Evidence Hub

Catheter ablation of typical atrial flutter in a patient with left ventricular assist device support: a case report

Kaya A, Karaçam M, Kovancı T, Tanyeri Uzel S, Uslu A

The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology, 2026

Abstract

Background: Atrial arrhythmias are a frequent and clinically significant complication in left ventricular assist device (LVAD)-supported patients, with the potential to impair right ventricular (RV) function, compromise device hemodynamics, and reduce quality of life. While atrial fibrillation (AF) has received considerable attention in this population, the distinct hemodynamic impact of typical cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI)-dependent atrial flutter and the role of catheter-based rhythm control remain poorly characterized.

Case presentation: A 60-year-old male with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy who underwent HeartMate 3 LVAD implantation as a bridge to transplantation developed typical CTI-dependent atrial flutter refractory to medical therapy, associated with marked deterioration in RV systolic function (TAPSE: 1.2 → 0.82 cm; Sm: 6.9 → 5.3 cm/s) and adverse LVAD hemodynamics. Electrical cardioversion had been attempted but failed to maintain sinus rhythm. Electrophysiological study using three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping (CARTO system, Biosense Webster) confirmed counterclockwise CTI-dependent atrial flutter. Radiofrequency (RF) ablation of the cavotricuspid isthmus achieved bidirectional conduction block and restored sinus rhythm. The procedure was performed under uninterrupted therapeutic anticoagulation with warfarin.

Results: At one-month follow-up, RV systolic function improved substantially (TAPSE: 0.82 → 1.19 cm; Sm: 5.3 → 6.5 cm/s), with concurrent normalization…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free