PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 6, 2026European Heart Journal0 citations

Analgosedation in invasive electrophysiology: protocol in the absence of an anesthesiologist

View Full Paper
ASA SabatiniFTFederica TorriMMMassimiliano Manfrin

Key Result

A deep analgosedation protocol using midazolam and pethidine for atrial fibrillation ablation was effective and safe, achieving complete patient immobility with no reported side effects.

Key Points

  • This work aims to optimize pain relief during atrial fibrillation ablation in the absence of an anesthesiologist.
  • 218 subjects undergoing electrophysiology study and possible ablation were included from April 2024 to January 2025.
  • 113 subjects enrolled with a deep analgosedation protocol using intravenous midazolam and pethidine boluses.
  • Continuous monitoring for blood pressure, pulse oximetry, and heart and respiratory rates performed during procedures.
  • Atrial fibrillation cases primarily affected males (76%).
  • Patients remained stable and asymptomatic during procedures with no reported movement.
  • Effective maintenance of analgosedation was achieved without intra- or post-procedural side effects.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=113)

Multicenter

No

Structured PICO

Does an intravenous midazolam and pethidine analgosedation protocol provide effective pain relief and safety during atrial fibrillation ablation in the absence of an anesthesiologist?

P
Population
113 patients (24% female) undergoing elective atrial fibrillation catheter ablation procedures under a deep analgosedation protocol.
E
Exposure
Deep analgosedation protocol using intravenous Midazolam and Pethidine boluses intraprocedurally, administered by cardiologists without an anesthesiologist.
O
Outcome
Efficacy of pain relief, patient movement, and intraprocedural clinical stability.safety

A cardiologist-directed deep analgosedation protocol using midazolam and pethidine is safe and effective for preventing patient movement and pain during AF ablation without requiring an anesthesiologist.

Limitations

  • Impossibility to organize the study into a randomized trial due to Italian legislation regarding propofol
  • Not a randomized trial due to Italian legislation regarding propofol

Abstract

Abstract Background Common practice regarding deep analgosedation in interventional electrophysiology (EP) worldwide is not yet well established and outlined. it is subject to institutional, local and international rules-laws. AF Ablation procedures require analgosedation. It is important for patient not to move during ablation to minimize the risk of complications through transeptal puncture and reducing the risk of re-mapping and complications in catheter navigation and ablation. Currently, Pulsed Field Ablation (PFA) is performed under general anesthetic (GA) deep sedation (i.e. propofol), necessitating anesthesiologists support due to restricting propofol use regulations. Purpose This work aims to evaluate the efficacy of and determine/optimize the best available therapeutic plan to relieve pain during complex and more painful atrial fibrillation catheter ablation procedures in the absence of an anesthesiologist, considering that in Italy, currently, the use of propofol is the prerogative of the anesthesiologist-resuscitator, and not of the cardiologist. Methods 218 consecutive subjects presented to our Laboratory for EP study and possible ablation (April 10, 2024 - January 23, 2025), under elective EP procedure regimen. Of these, 113 subjects were enrolled in the study, 86 male (76%) and 27 female (24%). The deep analgosedation protocol of our EP laboratory uses i.v. Midazolam and Pethidine boluses intraprocedurally, under continuous blood pressure, pulse oximetry, heart and respiratory rhythm and rate monitoring. After ablation, patients were monitored for 2-3 hours until discharge. The EP procedures were divided into groups: Pulmonary Vein Isolation (PVI) only, PVI + Lines, PVI + CTI. Ablation energy modes: Point-by-point Radiofrequency, Cryo and PFA. Results In Figures. Conclusions · In symptomatic atrial fibrillation cases, with indication for ablation, male gender is prevalent (76%). · The most important data is the complete asymptomatic nature and intraprocedural clinical stability of patients and the absolute absence of movement. The maintenance of deep analgosedation was easy and effective. · Trend of indexed dosage per kg for both Pethidine and Midazolam is not closely related to procedure duration. · Correlation between dosage trend of Pethidine and Midazolam does not exhibit strong positive correlation. · In summary: despite the impossibility to organize this study into a randomized trial, due to the Italian legislation regarding propofol, the management and maintenance of deep analgosedation was easy, effective and safe. No intra- or post-procedural side effects related were reported. Good sedation parameters were achieved and positive feedback reported by patients obtained. The use of this deep analgosedation protocol, asks for EP professionals be trained in cardiac sedation and advanced cardiac life support. Currently, there is no standardized strategy for deep analgosedation protocols.Figure1 Figure2

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Sabatini et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=113). Deep analgosedation protocol (Midazolam and Pethidine) was evaluated on Efficacy and safety of deep analgosedation (absence of movement, side effects). A deep analgosedation protocol using midazolam and pethidine for atrial fibrillation ablation was effective and safe, achieving complete patient immobility with no reported side effects.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698585438f7c464f230087f1https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf784.847
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper