REFERENCES
1. Chen CF, Gao XF, Duan X, et al. Comparison of catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation between cryoballoon and radiofrequency: A meta-analysis. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2017;48:351-366.
2. Leshem E, Zilberman I, Tschabrunn CM, et al. High-power and short-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: Biophysical characterization. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;4:467-479.
3. Patel PJ, Padanilam BJ. High-power short-duration ablation: Better, safer, and faster? J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018;29:1576-1577.
4. Bunch TJ, May HT, Bair TL, et al. Long-term outcomes after low power, slower movement versus high power, faster movement irrigated-tip catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm.2020 Feb;17(2):184-189.
5. Thiyagarajah A, Kadhim K, Lau DH, et al. Feasibility, safety, and efficacy of posterior wall isolation during atrial fibrillation ablation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.2019 Aug;12(8):e007005.
6. Solimene F, Lepillier A, De Ruvo E, et al. Reproducibility of acute pulmonary vein isolation guided by the ablation index. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2019 Jul;42(7):874-881.
7. Bhaskaran A, Chik W, Pouliopoulos J, et al. Five seconds of 50-60 w radio frequency atrial ablations were transmural and safe: An in vitro mechanistic assessment and force-controlled in vivo validation. Europace. 2017;19:874-880.
8. Stang A. Critical evaluation of the newcastle-ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010 Sep;25(9):603-5.
9. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (moose) group. JAMA. 2000 Apr 19;283(15):2008-12.
10. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised
controlled trials: The quorom statement. Onkologie. 2000 Dec;23(6):597-602.
11. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled clinical trials. 1986;7:177-188.
12. Bowden J, Tierney JF, Copas AJ, et al. Quantifying, displaying and accounting for heterogeneity in the
meta-analysis of rcts using standard and generalised q statistics. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011 Apr 7;11:41.
13. Castrejón-Castrejón S, Martínez Cossiani M, Ortega Molina M, et al. Feasibility and safety of pulmonary vein isolation by high-power short-duration radiofrequency application: Short-term results of the power-fast pilot study. J Interv Card Electrophysiol.2020 Jan;57(1):57-65.
14. Kottmaier M, Popa M, Bourier F, et al. Safety and outcome of very high-power short-duration ablation using 70 w for pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Europace. 2020;22:388-393.
15. Berte B, Hilfiker G, Russi I, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation using a higher power shorter duration close protocol with a surround flow ablation catheter. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019 Nov;30(11):2199-2204.
16. Dhillon G, Ahsan S, Honarbakhsh S, et al. A multicentered evaluation of ablation at higher power guided by ablation index: Establishing ablation targets for pulmonary vein isolation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30:357-365.
17. Pambrun T, Durand C, Constantin M, et al. High-power (40-50 w) radiofrequency ablation guided by unipolar signal modification for pulmonary vein isolation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019 Jun;12(6):e007304.
18. Baher A, Kheirkhahan M, Rechenmacher SJ, et al. High-power radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: Using late gadolinium enhancement magnetic resonance imaging as a novel index of esophageal injury. JACC. Clinical electrophysiology. 2018;4:1583-1594.
19. Yazaki K, Ejima K. Impedance drop predicts acute electrical reconnection of the pulmonary vein-left atrium after pulmonary vein isolation using short-duration high-power exposure. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020 Jan 4.
20. Vassallo F, Cunha C, Serpa E, et al. Comparison of high-power short-duration (hpsd) ablation of atrial fibrillation using a contact force-sensing catheter and conventional technique: Initial results. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019 Oct;30(10):1877-1883.
21. Barkagan M, Contreras-Valdes FM, Leshem E, et al. High-power and short-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: Safety, efficacy, and long-term durability. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018 Sep;29(9):1287-1296.
22. Ali-Ahmed F, Goyal V, Patel M, et al. High-power, low-flow, short-ablation duration-the key to avoid collateral injury? J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2019;55:9-16. doi: 10.1007/s10840-018-0473-5.
23. Reddy VY, Grimaldi M, De Potter T, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation with very high power, short duration, temperature-controlled lesions: The qdot-fast trial. JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology. 2019;5:778-786.
24. Simmers TA, Tukkie R. How to perform pulmonary vein isolation for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: Use of the localisa catheter navigation system. Europace. 2004;6:92-96.
25. Beinart R, Abbara S, Blum A, et al. Left atrial wall thickness variability measured by ct scans in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2011;22:1232-1236.
26. Jilek C, Lewalter T. Ablation for atrial fibrillation in the elderly. Herz. 2017;28:39-47.
27. Winkle RA, Moskovitz R, Hardwin Mead R, et al. Atrial fibrillation ablation using very short duration 50 w ablations and contact force sensing catheters. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2018;52:1-8.
28. Cabrera JA, Ho SY, Climent V, et al. The architecture of the left lateral atrial wall: A particular anatomic region with implications for ablation of atrial fibrillation. European heart journal. 2008;29:356-362.
29. Bourier F, Duchateau J. High-power short-duration versus standard radiofrequency ablation: Insights on lesion metrics. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018 Nov;29(11):1570-1575.
30. Andrade JG, Champagne J, Dubuc M, et al. Cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation assessed by continuous monitoring: A randomized clinical trial. Circulation. 2019 Nov 26;140(22):1779-1788.
31. Mujovic N, Marinkovic M, Lenarczyk R, et al. Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: An overview for clinicians. Advances in therapy. 2017;34:1897-1917.
32. Winkle RA, Mohanty S, Patrawala RA, et al. Low complication rates using high power (45–50 w) for short duration for atrial fibrillation ablations. Heart rhythm. 2019;16:165-169.
33. Kanj MH, Wazni O, Fahmy T, et al. Pulmonary vein antral isolation using an open irrigation ablation catheter for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: A randomized pilot study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 Apr 17;49(15):1634-1641.
34. Winkle RA, Mead RH, Engel G, et al. Atrial fibrillation ablation: ”Perpetual motion” of open irrigated tip catheters at 50 w is safe and improves outcomes. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011;34:531-539.
35. Wolf M, El Haddad M, De Wilde V, et al. Endoscopic evaluation of the esophagus after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation using contiguous and optimized radiofrequency applications. Heart rhythm. 2019;16:1013-1020.
36. Plenge T, van den Bruck JH, Luker J, et al. Porous tip contact force-sensing catheters for pulmonary vein isolation: Performance in a clinical routine setting. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020 Mar;57(2):251-259.