Irrigated vs. Non-irrigated Catheters in the Ablation of Accessory Pathways

Gregory P. Siroky, Meruka Hazari, Zyad Younan, Archana Patel, Joshua Balog, Andrew Rudnick, John Kassotis, William J. Kostis, James Coromilas, Deepak Saluja

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations


There is a paucity of data comparing irrigated to non-irrigated catheters in the ablation of accessory pathways (AP) in adult patients. Retrospective analysis of first-time AP ablations performed at our institution from May 2010 to June 2017. A total of 69 AP ablations were studied; irrigated catheters were used in 78.3% cases. Mean age was 40.9 ± 14.3 years and 56.7% were male. Among APs, 63.8% were left sided and 56.5% were concealed. The total procedure time was 232.0 ± 89.0 min, ablation time was 3.1 ± 5.1 min, and fluoroscopy time was 13.9 ± 15.4 min. The overall acute success rate of ablation was 62/69 (89%). Success rates trended higher with irrigated catheters in both groups and were significant for the population as a whole (94.4% vs. 73.3%, p = 0.04). Analyzing the entire cohort, success rates were significantly higher in ablations using irrigated catheters.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)612-617
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Cardiovascular Translational Research
Issue number4
StatePublished - 1 Aug 2020
Externally publishedYes


  • Ablation
  • Accessory pathway
  • Irrigated catheters
  • Non-irrigated catheters


Dive into the research topics of 'Irrigated vs. Non-irrigated Catheters in the Ablation of Accessory Pathways'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this