Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 11, 2025
Reduced Procedure Time and Variability with Active Esophageal Cooling During Radiofrequency Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: August 25, 2022
Machine learning-based risk models for procedural complications of radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation
Rong Li1, Lan Shen1, Wenyan Ma1
1Clinical Research Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Background:
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a risk of complications. This study aimed to develop and validate risk models for predicting complications after radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation patients.
Methods:
This retrospective cohort study included 3365 procedures on 3187 patients with atrial fibrillation at a single medical center from 2018 to 2021. The outcome was the occurrence of postoperative procedural complications during hospitalization. Logistic regression, decision tree, random forest, gradient boosting machine, and extreme gradient boosting were used to develop risk models for any postoperative complications, cardiac effusion/tamponade, and hemorrhage, respectively. Patients' demographic characteristics, medical history, signs, symptoms at presentation, electrocardiographic features, procedural characteristics, laboratory values, and postoperative complications were collected from the medical record. The prediction results were evaluated by performance metrics (i.e., the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F score, and Brier score) with repeated fivefold cross-validation.
Results:
Of the 3365 RFA procedures, there were 62 procedural complications with a rate of 1.84% in the entire cohort. The most common complications were cardiac effusion/tamponade (28 cases, 0.83%), and hemorrhage (21 cases, 0.80%). There was no procedure-related mortality. The machine learning algorithms of random forest (RF) outperformed other models for any complication (AUC 0.721 vs 0.627 to 0.707), and hemorrhage (AUC 0.839 vs 0.649 to 0.794). The extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) model outperformed other models for cardiac effusion/tamponade (AUC 0.696 vs 0.606 to 0.662).
Conclusions:
The developed risk models using machine learning algorithms showed good performance in predicting complications after RFA of AF patients. These models help identify patients at high risk of complications and guiding clinical decision-making.
