Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
The Safety and Efficacy of Epicardial Carbon Dioxide Insufflation Compared With Conventional Epicardial Access
Authors' conclusion
EpiCO2 access is associated with lower rates of major complication and bleeding when compared with ConvEpi access.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing epicardial access (VT ablation), single high-volume center, January 2021–December 202317 operators
- Participants
- 153 patients
- Exposure
- EpiCO2 vs Conventional Epi (ConvEpi) access
- EpiCO2n = 73
- ConvEpin = 80reference
- Outcome
- Feasibility (access success) and safety of epicardial access
Methodological detailssingle-centre, high-volume center, operator discretion
- Single-centre
- High-volume center
- Operator discretion
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Epicardial (Epi) access success
P = 0.4
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Total Epi access time · shorter with ConvEpi
P < 0.001
Total procedure duration
- Total procedure duration similar
Safety
Major Epi access-related complications
P = 0.02
Bleeding ≥80 mL — ConvEpi vs EpiCO2 · unadjusted
P = 0.02
| Outcome | OR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bleeding ≥80 mLEpiCO2vs ConvEpiAdjusted for age, repeat Epi access, antithrombotic therapy | 0.27 (0.08–0.89) | P = 0.03 | |
| 0.050.21520Odds ratio (log scale) |
Original publication
The Safety and Efficacy of Epicardial Carbon Dioxide Insufflation Compared With Conventional Epicardial Access. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. Published 16 May 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →