The “16‐gram window” of contact‐force: A new criterion for very high‐power short‐duration ablation

Abstract Background Very high‐power short‐duration (vHPSD) ablation with the novel QDOT™ catheter allows the regulation of target temperature by automatically adjusting flow and power during a 4 s application of 90 W. However, the optimal contact force for sufficient lesion creation is unknown. Meth...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dimitrios Bismpos, Jan Wintrich, Valerie Pavlicek, Raphael Spittler, Alexander P. Benz, Michael Böhm, German Fernandez Ferro, Felix Mahfoud, Thomas Rostock, Christian Ukena
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-06-01
Series:Journal of Arrhythmia
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/joa3.70076
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849433074819923968
author Dimitrios Bismpos
Jan Wintrich
Valerie Pavlicek
Raphael Spittler
Alexander P. Benz
Michael Böhm
German Fernandez Ferro
Felix Mahfoud
Thomas Rostock
Christian Ukena
author_facet Dimitrios Bismpos
Jan Wintrich
Valerie Pavlicek
Raphael Spittler
Alexander P. Benz
Michael Böhm
German Fernandez Ferro
Felix Mahfoud
Thomas Rostock
Christian Ukena
author_sort Dimitrios Bismpos
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Very high‐power short‐duration (vHPSD) ablation with the novel QDOT™ catheter allows the regulation of target temperature by automatically adjusting flow and power during a 4 s application of 90 W. However, the optimal contact force for sufficient lesion creation is unknown. Methods We enrolled 73 patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using the QDOT catheter in the vHPSD mode (90 W, 4 s). Ablation metrics associated with suboptimal applications, defined as either an impedance drop of ≤5% or a cumulative temperature‐limited energy ≤330 J, were collected and analyzed. Results A total of 3881 vHPSD applications (53.2 applications per patient) with a mean contact force (CF) of 12.8 ± 6.6 g were analyzed. Significant CF variability and intermittent loss of contact were documented in 18.2% and 8.8% of the applications, respectively. A ΔImp ≤ 5% occurred in 3.9% of vHPSD applications, while a cumulative energy ≤ 330 J was observed in 3% of the applications. Applications with a mean CF < 6 g and >22 g were associated with an inadequate impedance drop (10.3%, Phi coefficient 0.118, p < .001) and total applied energy (7.8%, Phi coefficient 0.094, p < .001) respectively. At superior PV segments with thick atrial walls, significantly more applications with cumulative energy ≤330 J (4.2% vs. 2.5%; p = .007) were observed, especially when mean CF > 18 g was applied (8.4%, Phi coefficient 0.093, p = .003). Conclusion A lower but also a higher mean contact‐force was associated with suboptimal vHPSD applications. Hence, a “16‐gram window” of contact‐force, from 6 to 22 g, could optimize energy application in vHPSD ablation.
format Article
id doaj-art-466e8ecfcd2a44e2b4e5d3be398e7bcd
institution Kabale University
issn 1880-4276
1883-2148
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Arrhythmia
spelling doaj-art-466e8ecfcd2a44e2b4e5d3be398e7bcd2025-08-20T03:27:11ZengWileyJournal of Arrhythmia1880-42761883-21482025-06-01413n/an/a10.1002/joa3.70076The “16‐gram window” of contact‐force: A new criterion for very high‐power short‐duration ablationDimitrios Bismpos0Jan Wintrich1Valerie Pavlicek2Raphael Spittler3Alexander P. Benz4Michael Böhm5German Fernandez Ferro6Felix Mahfoud7Thomas Rostock8Christian Ukena9Department of Internal Medicine III, Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Saarland University Homburg Saar GermanyDepartment of Internal Medicine III, Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Saarland University Homburg Saar GermanyDepartment of Internal Medicine III, Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Saarland University Homburg Saar GermanyDepartment of Cardiology II/Electrophysiology, Center for Cardiology University Hospital Mainz Mainz GermanyDepartment of Cardiology II/Electrophysiology, Center for Cardiology University Hospital Mainz Mainz GermanyDepartment of Internal Medicine III, Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Saarland University Homburg Saar GermanyDepartment of Cardiology II/Electrophysiology, Center for Cardiology University Hospital Mainz Mainz GermanyDepartment of Internal Medicine III, Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Saarland University Homburg Saar GermanyDepartment of Cardiology II/Electrophysiology, Center for Cardiology University Hospital Mainz Mainz GermanyDepartment of Internal Medicine III, Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Saarland University Homburg Saar GermanyAbstract Background Very high‐power short‐duration (vHPSD) ablation with the novel QDOT™ catheter allows the regulation of target temperature by automatically adjusting flow and power during a 4 s application of 90 W. However, the optimal contact force for sufficient lesion creation is unknown. Methods We enrolled 73 patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using the QDOT catheter in the vHPSD mode (90 W, 4 s). Ablation metrics associated with suboptimal applications, defined as either an impedance drop of ≤5% or a cumulative temperature‐limited energy ≤330 J, were collected and analyzed. Results A total of 3881 vHPSD applications (53.2 applications per patient) with a mean contact force (CF) of 12.8 ± 6.6 g were analyzed. Significant CF variability and intermittent loss of contact were documented in 18.2% and 8.8% of the applications, respectively. A ΔImp ≤ 5% occurred in 3.9% of vHPSD applications, while a cumulative energy ≤ 330 J was observed in 3% of the applications. Applications with a mean CF < 6 g and >22 g were associated with an inadequate impedance drop (10.3%, Phi coefficient 0.118, p < .001) and total applied energy (7.8%, Phi coefficient 0.094, p < .001) respectively. At superior PV segments with thick atrial walls, significantly more applications with cumulative energy ≤330 J (4.2% vs. 2.5%; p = .007) were observed, especially when mean CF > 18 g was applied (8.4%, Phi coefficient 0.093, p = .003). Conclusion A lower but also a higher mean contact‐force was associated with suboptimal vHPSD applications. Hence, a “16‐gram window” of contact‐force, from 6 to 22 g, could optimize energy application in vHPSD ablation.https://doi.org/10.1002/joa3.70076atrial fibrillationcontact‐force sensing ablationpulmonary vein isolationradiofrequency ablationvery high‐power short‐duration ablation
spellingShingle Dimitrios Bismpos
Jan Wintrich
Valerie Pavlicek
Raphael Spittler
Alexander P. Benz
Michael Böhm
German Fernandez Ferro
Felix Mahfoud
Thomas Rostock
Christian Ukena
The “16‐gram window” of contact‐force: A new criterion for very high‐power short‐duration ablation
Journal of Arrhythmia
atrial fibrillation
contact‐force sensing ablation
pulmonary vein isolation
radiofrequency ablation
very high‐power short‐duration ablation
title The “16‐gram window” of contact‐force: A new criterion for very high‐power short‐duration ablation
title_full The “16‐gram window” of contact‐force: A new criterion for very high‐power short‐duration ablation
title_fullStr The “16‐gram window” of contact‐force: A new criterion for very high‐power short‐duration ablation
title_full_unstemmed The “16‐gram window” of contact‐force: A new criterion for very high‐power short‐duration ablation
title_short The “16‐gram window” of contact‐force: A new criterion for very high‐power short‐duration ablation
title_sort 16 gram window of contact force a new criterion for very high power short duration ablation
topic atrial fibrillation
contact‐force sensing ablation
pulmonary vein isolation
radiofrequency ablation
very high‐power short‐duration ablation
url https://doi.org/10.1002/joa3.70076
work_keys_str_mv AT dimitriosbismpos the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT janwintrich the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT valeriepavlicek the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT raphaelspittler the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT alexanderpbenz the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT michaelbohm the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT germanfernandezferro the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT felixmahfoud the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT thomasrostock the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT christianukena the16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT dimitriosbismpos 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT janwintrich 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT valeriepavlicek 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT raphaelspittler 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT alexanderpbenz 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT michaelbohm 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT germanfernandezferro 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT felixmahfoud 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT thomasrostock 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation
AT christianukena 16gramwindowofcontactforceanewcriterionforveryhighpowershortdurationablation