Standard vs Augmented Ablation of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence: The AWARE Randomized Clinical Trial

Quantitative comparison of the isolation lesions between conventional- and larger-sized visually guided laser balloon ablation

BACKGROUND

The importance of a wider circumferential isolation of the pulmonary veins (PV), which includes a large portion of the left atrial posterior wall (LAPW), has been suggested in several studies. However, the extended isolation area using a larger inflated visually guided laser balloon (VGLB) ablation remains to be elucidated.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent VGLB ablation were enrolled in this prospective study. An electroanatomic map of the left atrium was obtained before and after PV isolation (PVI) using a conventional-sized VGLB. The isolation areas were extended by the largest-sized VGLB ablation and remapped in the same manner. After the ablation, isolation areas were calculated with CARTO-3 system. The one-year atrial arrhythmia (Ata) recurrence was assessed.  RESULTS: The largest-sized VGLB ablation yielded statistically greater areas of isolation in left-sided PV antrum (PVA) (11.5 ± 2.3 cm2 vs. 15.9 ± 3.5 cm2, P < .001) and right-sided PVA (14.2 ± 3.3 cm2 vs. 20.6 ± 4.4 cm2, P < .001) than the conventional-sized VGLB. Further, non-ablated LAPW (12.3 ± 4.4 cm2 vs. 7.8 ± 3.9 cm2, P < .001) was significantly reduced after largest-sized VGLB ablation, compared to the conventional-sized VGLB ablation. The one-year Ata freedom was 83.7% in patients with paroxysmal AF and 96.4% in those with persistent AF.

CONCLUSION

The largest-sized VGLB ablation technique can create a significantly wider isolation area of PVA and debulk a large amount of LAPW than the conventional-sized VGLB ablation. The one-year outcome was similarly high in paroxysmal and persistent AF.

Adjunctive low-voltage area ablation for patients with atrial fibrillation: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of adjunctive low-voltage area (LVA) ablation on outcomes of catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) remains uncertain.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CA with versus without LVA ablation for patients with AF. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled with a random-effects model. Our primary endpoint was recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA), including AF, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia. We used R version 4.3.1 for all statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included 10 RCTs encompassing 1780 patients, of whom 890 (50%) were randomized to LVA ablation. Adjunctive LVA ablation significantly reduced recurrence of ATA (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.67-0.88; p < .01) and reduced the number of redo ablation procedures (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.35-0.85; p < .01), as compared with conventional ablation. Among 691 (43%) patients with documented LVAs on baseline substrate mapping, adjunctive LVA ablation substantially reduced ATA recurrences (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38-0.86; p < .01). There was no significant difference between groups in terms of periprocedural adverse events (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.39-1.56; p = .49).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive LVA ablation is an effective and safe strategy for reducing recurrences of ATA among patients who undergo CA for AF.

High-power short-duration versus low-power long-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: A substudy of the AWARE randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Pulmonary vein isolations (PVI) are being performed using a high-power, short-duration (HPSD) strategy. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and safety outcomes of an HPSD versus low-power, long-duration (LPLD) approach to PVI in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

Patients were grouped according to a HPSD (≥40 W) or LPLD (≤35 W) strategy. The primary endpoint was the 1-year recurrence of any atrial arrhythmia lasting ≥30 s, detected using three 14-day ambulatory continuous ECG monitoring. Procedural and safety endpoints were also evaluated. The primary analysis were regression models incorporating propensity scores yielding adjusted relative risk (RRa ) and mean difference (MDa ) estimates.

RESULTS

Of the 398 patients included in the AWARE Trial, 173 (43%) underwent HPSD and 225 (57%) LPLD ablation. The distribution of power was 50 W in 75%, 45 W in 20%, and 40 W in 5% in the HPSD group, and 35 W with 25 W on the posterior wall in the LPLD group. The primary outcome was not statistically significant at 30.1% versus 22.2% in HPSD and LPLD groups with RRa 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI]) 0.55-1.10; p = .165). The secondary outcome of repeat catheter ablation was not statistically significant at 6.9% and 9.8% (RRa 1.59 [95% CI 0.77-3.30]; p = .208) respectively, nor was the incidence of any ECG documented AF during the blanking period: 1.7% versus 8.0% (RRa 3.95 [95% CI 1.00-15.61; p = .049) in the HPSD versus LPLD group respectively. The total procedure time was significantly shorter in the HPSD group (MDa 97.5 min [95% CI 84.8-110.4)]; p < .0001) with no difference in adjudicated serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

An HPSD strategy was associated with significantly shorter procedural times with similar efficacy in terms of clinical arrhythmia recurrence. Importantly, there was no signal for increased harm with a HPSD strategy.

Outcomes of pulmonary vein isolation with radiofrequency balloon vs. cryoballoon ablation: a multi-centric study

AIMS

Cryoballoon (CB) ablation is the mainstay of single-shot pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). A radiofrequency balloon (RFB) catheter has recently emerged as an alternative. However, these two technologies have not been compared. This study aims to evaluate the freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATas) at 1 year: procedural characteristics, efficacy, and safety of the novel RFB compared with CB for PVI in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

This prospective multi-centre study included consecutive patients with symptomatic drug-resistant paroxysmal AF who underwent PVI with RFB or CB between July 2021 and January 2022 from three European centres. A total of 375 consecutive patients were included, 125 in the RFB group and 250 in the CB. Both groups had comparable clinical characteristics. At 12.33 ± 4.91 months, ATas-free rates were 83.20% and 82.00% in the RFB and CB groups, respectively (P > 0.05). Compared with the CB group, the RFB group showed a shorter procedure time [59.91 (45.80-77.12) vs. 77.0 (35.13-122.71) min (P < 0.001)], dwell time [19.59 (14.41-30.24) vs. 27.03 (17.11-57.21) min (P = 0.04)], time to isolation, and thermal energy delivery in all pulmonary veins (P < 0.001). First-pass isolation was comparable. No major complications occurred in either group, with no stroke, atrio-oesophageal fistula, or permanent phrenic nerve injury. Transient phrenic nerve palsy occurred more frequently with CB than RFB (7.20% vs. 3.20%; P = 0.02). Oesophageal temperature rise occurred in 21 (16.8%) patients in the RFB group, and gastroscopy showed erythema in two of them with complete recovery after 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The RFB appears to have a safety and efficacy profile similar to that of the CB for PVI. Shorter procedural times appear to be driven by shorter left atrial dwell and thermal delivery times.