An ablation index operator-independent approach to improve efficacy in atrial fibrillation ablation at 24-month follow-up: a single center experience

High-power short-duration catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: is it really a new era? Comparison between new and old radiofrequency contact force-sensing catheters

BACKGROUND

The clinical performance of high-power, short-duration (HPSD) pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with the novel flexible tip TactiFlex™ (TFSE) catheter, as compared to standard-power, long-duration (SPLD) PVI using the TactiCath™ (TCSE) catheter among patients undergoing catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) is currently unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, observational, single-centre study including 40 consecutive patients undergoing PVI for paroxysmal/persistent AF, using HPSD ablation with the novel TFSE catheter (HPSD/TFSE group). Based on propensity score-matching, forty patients undergoing SPLD PVI with the TCSE catheter were identified (SPLD/TCSE group). In the HPSD/TFSE group, RF lesions were performed by delivering 40-50 W for 10-20 s, while in the SPLD/TCSE group, RF power was 30-35 W, targeting a lesion size index (LSI) of 4.0-5.5. The co-primary study outcomes were time required to complete PVI and first pass isolation (FPI).

RESULTS

PVI was achieved in 100% of patients in both groups, and no major adverse events were observed. Remarkably, PVI time was shorter in the HPSD/TFSE, compared to the SPLD/TCSE group(9 [7-9] min vs. 50 [37-54] min; p < 0.001), while FPI rate was non-significantly higher in the former group(91% [146/160] vs 83% [134/160]; p = 0.063). Shorter procedural (108 [91-120] min vs. 173 [139-187] min, p < 0.001), total RF (9 [7-11] min vs. 43 [32-53] min, p < 0.001), fluoroscopy times(15 [10-19] min vs. 18 [13-26] min, p = 0.014), and lower DAP (1461 [860-2181] vs. 7200 [3400-20,800], p < 0.001) were recorded in the HPSD/TFSE group. A higher average impedance drop was obtained with HPSD/TFSE CA(17[17-18]Ω vs. 16 [15-17] Ω, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In our initial clinical experience, HPSD PVI with the TFSE catheter proved faster than SPLD PVI with the TCSE catheter, at least equally effective in terms of FPI, and it was associated with greater impedance drop.

Long-term results of ablation index guided atrial fibrillation ablation: insights after 5+ years of follow-up from the MPH AF Ablation Registry

Background

Catheter ablation (CA) for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) offers the best outcomes for patients. Despite the benefits of CA, a significant proportion of patients suffer a recurrence; hence, there is scope to potentially improve outcomes through technical innovations such as ablation index (AI) guidance during AF ablation. We present real-world 5-year follow-up data of AI-guided pulmonary vein isolation.

Methods

We retrospectively followed 123 consecutive patients who underwent AI-guided CA shortly after its introduction to routine practice. Data were collected from the MPH AF Ablation Registry with the approval of the institutional research board.

Results

Our patient cohort was older, with higher BMI, greater CHA2DS2-VASc scores, and larger left atrial sizes compared to similar previously published cohorts, while gender balance and other characteristics were similar. The probability of freedom from atrial arrhythmia with repeat procedures is as follows: year 1: 0.95, year 2: 0.92, year 3: 0.85, year 4: 0.79, and year 5: 0.72. Age >75 years (p = 0.02, HR: 2.7, CI: 1.14-6.7), BMI >35 kg/m2 (p = 0.0009, HR: 4.6, CI: 1.8-11.4), and left atrial width as measured on CT in the upper quartile (p = 0.04, HR: 2.5, CI: 1-5.7) were statistically significant independent predictors of recurrent AF.

Conclusion

AI-guided CA is an effective treatment for AF, with 95.8% of patients remaining free from atrial arrhythmia at 1 year and 72.3% at 5 years, allowing for repeat procedures. It is safe with a low major complication rate of 1.25%. Age >75 years, BMI >35 kg/m2, and markedly enlarged atria were associated with higher recurrence rates.

The predictive value of tissue response viewer for lesion transmurality in a porcine model

BACKGROUND

The tissue response viewer (TRV) is a multiparametric index that incorporates time, power, tissue pressure, impedance, and wall thickness data during radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) and is used to predict the transmurality of lesions. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of the TRV in a porcine model.

METHODS

Twelve pigs underwent preablation high-density voltage and activation mapping of two atria, and both were repeated after linear RFCA. Intentional gaps were kept in the left atrium (LA) and were touched up in the right atrium (RA). Standard and high powers were, respectively, performed in the LA ablation. Six pigs were immediately sacrificed for pathological examination after the mapping and ablation procedure (acute study). Another six pigs were kept for 4 weeks before remapping and pathological examination (chronic study).

RESULTS

All animals completed the planned procedure. The TRV function showed a sensitivity of 97.1% and a specificity of 76.9% in the acute study, and a sensitivity of 95.9% and a specificity of 72.5% in the chronic study to predict the transmural lesion. All positive and negative predictive values were over 80%. In addition, the TRV achieved higher sensitivity (92.3% vs. 85.0%) and specificity (88.2% vs. 78.9%) to predict the transmural lesion in LA ablation with high power compared with standard ablation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents the histopathological validation of TRV to predict transmural lesions. The use of TRV may guide a more individual ablation and a more precise touch-up of gaps for atrial arrhythmias.

Long-Term Follow-Up of Catheter Ablation for Premature Ventricular Complexes in the Modern Era: The Importance of Localization and Substrate

Background: Large-scale studies evaluating long-term recurrence rates in both idiopathic and non-idiopathic PVC catheter ablation (CA) patients have not been reported. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of idiopathic and non-idiopathic PVC CA, investigating the predictors of acute and long-term efficacy. Methods: This retrospective multicentric study included 439 patients who underwent PVC CA at three institutions from April-2015 to December-2021. Clinical success at 6 months’ follow-up, defined as a reduction of at least 80% of the pre-procedural PVC burden, was deemed the primary outcome. The secondary aims of the study were: clinical success at the last available follow-up, predictors of arrhythmic recurrences at long-term follow-up, and safety outcomes. Results: The median age was 51 years, with 24.9% patients being affected suffering from structural heart disease. The median pre-procedural PVC burden was 20.1%. PVCs originating from the RVOT were the most common index PVC observed (29.1%), followed by coronary cusp (CC) and non-outflow tract (OT) LV PVCs (23.1% and 19.0%). The primary outcome at 6 months was reached in 85.1% cases, with a significant reduction in the 24 h% PVC burden (−91.4% [−83.4; −96.7], p < 0.001); long-term efficacy was observed in 82.1% of cases at almost 3-year follow-up. The presence of underlying structural heart disease and non-OT LV region origin (aHR 1.77 [1.07−2.93], p = 0.027 and aHR = 1.96 [1.22−3.14], p = 0.005) was independently associated with recurrences. Conclusion: CA of both idiopathic and non-idiopathic PVCs showed a very good acute and long-term procedural success rate, with an overall low complication. Predictors of arrhythmic recurrence at follow-up were underlying structural heart disease and non-OT LV origin.

Efficacy of ablation index-guided pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Ablation index (AI) is a novel technology of ablation lesion quality to help improve homogeneity of lesion size and continuity. In this study, we aim to evaluate whether AI-guided PVI improves clinical outcomes compared to CF-guided PVI in patients with paroxysmal AF (PAF).

METHODS

Patients undergoing first-time radiofrequency ablation for PAF were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to two groups: AI-guided PVI and CF-guided PVI. In the AI group, AI ≥500 was recommended at the anterior/superior/inferior walls, 350-400 at the posterior wall, and inter-lesion distance ≤4 mm. The primary endpoint is the freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence during 12 months follow-up, without antiarrhythmic drug therapy (ADT). The key secondary endpoints include intra-procedural efficiency and peri-procedural complications.

RESULTS

225 patients were randomized (AI group (n = 149) and CF group(n = 76)). First-pass isolation rate in AI group was significantly higher than that in CF group (58.3% vs. 43.4%, p = 0.035). After a median follow-up of 12.2 months, 154/225(68.4%) of patients were free from atrial arrhythmia recurrence without ADT, which was higher in AI group compared with CF group, but without significant difference (71.1% vs. 63.2%, p = 0.253). The incidence of peri-procedural complications is low and without difference between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

AI-guided ablation provided higher acute efficacy than CF-guided ablation in PV isolation for patients with paroxysmal AF. The long-term success rate in AI group was higher than CF group, but did not reach statistical significance. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Ablation index-guided ablation with milder targets for atrial fibrillation: Comparison between high power and low power ablation

Background

High power-ablation index (HP-AI)-guided ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) targeting high AIs has been implemented in European countries. However, milder AI targets are widely used in Asia. The safety and efficacy of HP-AI-guided ablation compared with those of low-power AI-guided ablation in a milder AI-targeting setting are unknown. The goal of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of HP-AI-guided ablation in a milder AI-targeting setting.

Methods

Patients who underwent pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for AI-guided atrial fibrillation ablation in our center were enrolled and divided into 2 groups according to the ablation power used. In the HP-AI group, the ablation power was over 45 W, while the low power-AI group was ablated with <35 W power. The targeted AIs were 450–500 in the anterior wall and 350–400 in the posterior wall. The efficacy outcome was expressed as the single-procedure atrial arrhythmia-free survival between 91 days and 1 year. Safety outcomes included severe adverse events (SAEs), including symptomatic pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis, atrioesophagal fistula, cardiac tamponade, stroke, thromboembolism events, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding.

Results

A total of 134 patients were enrolled, of whom 74 underwent PVI using HP-AI, while 60 received low power-AI ablation. After a mean follow-up time of 7.4 months, 22 (16.4%) patients showed arrhythmia recurrence: 5 (6.8%) patients in the HP-AI group and 17 (28.3%) patients in the low power-AI group. The HP-AI group showed a significantly higher arrhythmia-free survival than the low power-AI group (p = 0.011). Two patients in the low power-AI group and 1 patient in the HP-AI group developed an SAE (p = NS). Compared with the low power-AI group, the HP-AI group demonstrated a higher PV first-pass isolation rate, shorter ablation time, and fewer patients with anatomical leakages and sites of unreached AI.

Conclusion

In a milder AI setting, HP-AI ablation might result in significantly higher arrhythmia-free survival than low power-AI ablation and a similar safety profile.

Ablation Index Predicts Successful Ablation of Focal Atrial Tachycardia: Results of a Multicenter Study

A radiofrequency energy lesion transmurality marker incorporating power, contact force, and time (Ablation Index, AI) was shown to be associated with outcomes of catheter ablation (CA) of multiple arrhythmias, but was never systematically assessed in the CA of focal atrial tachycardias (AT). We aimed to evaluate the role of AI as a predictor of outcomes in focal AT CA, and therefore, retrospectively included 45 consecutive patients undergoing CA for focal AT in four referral electrophysiology laboratories. Clinical and procedural information were collected. For each patient, maximum and mean (by averaging maximum AI values for each radiofrequency ablation lesion) AI were measured. The primary outcome was focal AT-free survival, and was systematically assessed with periodical Holter monitors or cardiac implantable electronic devices. CA was acutely effective in each case; however, 20% (n = 9) of the study population experienced a focal AT recurrence over a median follow-up of 288 days. Both maximum and mean AI values were significantly higher among patients without AT recurrences (maximum AI = 568 ± 91, mean AI = 426 ± 105) than in patients with AT relapses (maximum AI = 447 ± 142, mean AI = 352 ± 76, p = 0.036, and p = 0.028, respectively). The optimal cutoffs associated with freedom from recurrences were 461 for maximum AI (sensitivity, 0.89; specificity, 0.56) and 301 for mean AI (sensitivity, 0.97; specificity, 0.44). In a time-to-event analysis, maximum AI was significantly associated with survival free from AT recurrence (p = 0.001), whereas mean AI was not (p = 0.08). In summary, maximum AI is the best procedural parameter associated with the outcomes of CA for focal AT, and may help standardize the procedural approach.

Ablation Index-guided point-by-point ablation versus Grid annotation-guided dragging for pulmonary vein isolation: A randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Radiofrequency (RF) atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation using a catheter dragging technique may shorten procedural duration and improve durability of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) by creating uninterrupted linear ablation lesions. We compared a novel AF ablation approach guided by Grid annotation allowing for “drag lesions” with a standard point‐by‐point ablation approach in a single‐center randomized study.

Methods

Eighty‐eight paroxysmal or persistent AF patients were randomized 1:1 to undergo RF‐PVI with either a catheter dragging ablation technique guided by Grid annotation or point‐by‐point ablation guided by Ablation Index (AI) annotation. In the Grid annotation arm, ablation was visualized using 1 mm³ grid points coloring red after meeting predefined stability and contact force criteria. In the AI annotation arm, ablation lesions were created in a point‐by‐point fashion with AI target values set at 380 and 500 for posterior/inferior and anterior/roof segments, respectively. Patients were followed up for 12 months after PVI using ECGs, 24‐h Holter monitoring and a mobile‐based one‐lead ECG device.

Results

Procedure time was not different between the two randomization arms (Grid annotation 71 ± 19 min, AI annotation 72 ± 26 min, p = .765). RF time was significantly longer in the Grid annotation arm compared with the AI annotation arm (49 ± 8 min vs. 37 ± 8 min, respectively, p < .001). Atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence was documented in 10 patients (23%) in the Grid annotation arm compared with 19 patients (42%) in the AI annotation arm with time to recurrence not reaching statistical significance (p = .074).

Conclusions

This study shows that a Grid annotation‐guided dragging approach provides an alternative to point‐by‐point RF‐PVI using AI annotation.

Prospective use of ablation index for the ablation of right ventricle outflow tract premature ventricular contractions: a proof of concept study

AIMS

Radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) represents an effective option for idiopathic premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) treatment. Ablation Index (AI) is a novel ablation marker incorporating RF power, contact force, and time of delivery into a single weighted formula. Data regarding AI-guided PVCs RFCA are currently lacking. Aim of the study was to compare AI-guided and standard RFCA outcomes in patients with PVCs originating from the right ventricle outflow tract (RVOT).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients undergoing AI-guided RFCA of RVOT idiopathic PVCs were prospectively enrolled. Radiofrequency catheter ablation was performed following per-protocol target cut-offs of AI, depending on targeted area (RVOT free wall AI cut-off: 590; RVOT septum AI cut-off: 610). A multi-centre cohort of propensity-matched (age, sex, ejection fraction, and PVC site) patients undergoing standard PVCs RFCA was used as a comparator. Sixty AI-guided patients (44.2 ± 18.0 years old, 58% male, left ventricular ejection fraction 56.2 ± 3.8%) were enrolled; 34 (57%) were ablated in RVOT septum and 26 (43%) patients in the RVOT free wall area. Propensity match with 60 non-AI-guided patients was performed. Acute outcomes and complications resulted comparable. At 6 months, arrhythmic recurrence was more common in non-AI-guided patients whether in general (28% vs. 7% P = 0.003) or by ablated area (RVOT free wall: 27% vs. 4%, P = 0.06; RVOT septum 29% vs. 9% P = 0.05). Ablation Index guidance was associated with improved survival from arrhythmic recurrence [overall odds ratio 6.61 (1.95-22.35), P = 0.001; RVOT septum 5.99 (1.21-29.65), P = 0.028; RVOT free wall 11.86 (1.12-124.78), P = 0.039].

CONCLUSION

Ablation Index-guidance in idiopathic PVCs ablation was associated with better arrhythmic outcomes at 6 months of follow-up.

Efficacy and safety of ablation index-guided catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis

AIMS

Despite recent advances in catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF), pulmonary vein reconnection (PVR), and AF recurrence remain significantly high. Ablation index (AI) is a new method incorporating contact force, time, and power that should optimize procedural outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AI-guided catheter ablation compared to a non-AI-guided approach.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic search was performed on MEDLINE (via PubMED), EMBASE, COCHRANE, and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) databases (from inception to 1 July 2019). We included only studies that compared AI-guided with non-AI-guided catheter ablation of AF. Eleven studies reporting on 2306 patients were identified. Median follow-up period was 12 months. Ablation index-guided ablation had a significant shorter procedural time (141.0 vs. 152.8 min, P = 0.01; I2 = 90%), ablation time (21.8 vs. 32.0 min, P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%), achieved first-pass isolation more frequently [odds ratio (OR) = 0.09, 95%CI 0.04-0.21; 93.4% vs. 62.9%, P < 0.001; I2 = 58%] and was less frequently associated with acute PVR (OR = 0.37, 95%CI 0.18-0.75; 18.0% vs 35.0%; P = 0.006; I2 = 0%). Importantly, atrial arrhythmia relapse post-blanking was significantly lower in AI compared to non-AI catheter ablation (OR = 0.41, 95%CI 0.25-0.66; 11.8% vs. 24.9%, P = 0.0003; I2 = 35%). Finally, there was no difference in complication rate between AI and non-AI ablation, with the number of cardiac tamponade events in the AI group less being numerically lower (OR = 0.69, 95%CI 0.30-1.60, 1.6% vs. 2.5%, P = 0.39; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that AI-guided catheter ablation is associated with increased efficacy of AF ablation, while preserving a comparable safety profile to non-AI catheter ablation.

Standardized pulmonary vein isolation workflow to enclose veins with contiguous lesions: the multicentre VISTAX trial

AIMS

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of pulmonary vein isolation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) using a standardized workflow aiming to enclose the veins with contiguous and optimized radiofrequency lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This multicentre, prospective, non-randomized study was conducted at 17 European sites. Pulmonary vein isolation was guided by VISITAG SURPOINT (VS target ≥550 on the anterior wall; ≥400 on the posterior wall) and intertag distance (≤6 mm). Atrial arrhythmia recurrence was stringently monitored with weekly and symptom-driven transtelephonic monitoring on top of standard-of-care monitoring (24-h Holter and 12-lead electrocardiogram at 3, 6, and 12 months follow-up). Three hundred and forty participants with drug refractory PAF were enrolled. Acute effectiveness (first-pass isolation proof to a 30-min wait period and adenosine challenge) was 82.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 77.4-86.7%]. At 12-month follow-up, the rate of freedom from any documented atrial arrhythmia was 78.3% (95% CI 73.8-82.8%), while freedom from atrial arrhythmia by standard-of-care monitoring was 89.4% (95% CI 78.8-87.0%). Freedom fromrepeat ablations by the Kaplan-Meier analysis was 90.4% during 12 months of follow-up. Of the 34 patients with repeat ablations, 14 (41.2%) demonstrated full isolation of all pulmonary vein circles. Primary adverse event (PAE) rate was 3.6% (95% CI 1.9-6.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

The VISTAX trial demonstrated that a standardized PAF ablation workflow aiming for contiguous lesions leads to low rates of PAEs, high acute first-pass isolation rates, and 12-month freedom from arrhythmias approaching 80%. Further research is needed to improve the reproducibility of the outcomes across a wider range of centres.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03062046, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03062046.

Role of Indices Incorporating Power, Force and Time in AF Ablation: A Systematic Review of Literature

INTRODUCTION

Successful pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for atrial fibrillation (AF) depends on the formation of durable transmural lesions. Recently, novel indices have emerged to guide lesion delivery. The aim of the systematic review of literature was to determine AF recurrence following ablation guided by indices incorporating force, power and time, and compare acute procedural outcomes and 12-month AF recurrence with ablation guided by contact force (CF) guided only.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science Core Collection databases were searched on 27 January 2020 using the keywords; catheter ablation, ablation index (AI), lesion size index (LSI), contact force, atrial fibrillation.

RESULTS

After exclusions, seven studies were included in the analysis. AI-guided catheter ablation was associated with a 91% (n=5, 0.91 95% CI; 0.88-0.93) and 80% (n=5, 0.80, 95% CI; 0.77-0.84) freedom from AF at 12 months with and without the use of anti-arhythmic drugs respectively. As compared to CF guided ablation, AI-guided catheter ablation was associated with a 49% increase in successful first pass isolation (n=3; RR: 1.49, 95% CI; 1.38, 1.61), a 50% decrease in number of acute reconnections (n=4; RR: 0.50, 95% CI; 0.39-0.65) and a 22% (n=4, RR: 1.22, 95% CI; 1.10-1.35) increase in AF freedom without anti-arrhythmic drugs at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiofrequency ablation guided by AI was associated with higher successful first pass isolation and lower rates of acute reconnection which translates to greater freedom from AF at 12 months [CRD42019131469].

Dosimetric feasibility of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy in pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation using intensity-modulated proton therapy

Purpose

To evaluate dosimetric properties of intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for simulated treatment planning in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) targeting left atrial‐pulmonary vein junction (LA‐PVJ), in comparison with volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and helical tomotherapy (TOMO).

Methods

Ten thoracic 4D‐CT scans with respiratory motion and one with cardiac motion were used for the study. Ten respiratory 4D‐CTs were planned with VMAT, TOMO, and IMPT for simulated AF. Targets at the LA‐PVJ were defined as wide‐area circumferential ablation line. A single fraction of 25 Gy was prescribed to all plans. The interplay effects from cardiac motion were evaluated based on the cardiac 4D‐CT scan. Dose‐volume histograms (DVHs) of the ITV and normal tissues were compared. Statistical analysis was evaluated via one‐way Repeated‐Measures ANOVA and Friedman’s test with Bonferroni’s multiple comparisons test.

Results

The median volume of ITV was 8.72cc. All plans had adequate target coverage (V_23.75Gy ≥ 99%). Compared with VMAT and TOMO, IMPT resulted in significantly lower dose of most normal tissues. For VMAT, TOMO, and IMPT plans, D_mean of the whole heart was 5.52 ± 0.90 Gy, 5.89 ± 0.78 Gy, and 3.01 ± 0.57 Gy (P < 0.001), mean dose of pericardium was 4.74 ± 0.76 Gy, 4.98 ± 0.62 Gy, and 2.59 ± 0.44 Gy (P < 0.001), and D_0.03cc of left circumflex artery (LCX) was 13.96 ± 5.45 Gy, 14.34 ± 5.91 Gy, and 8.43 ± 7.24 Gy (P < 0.001), respectively. However, no significant advantage for one technique over the others was observed when examining the D_0.03cc of esophagus and main bronchi.

Conclusions

IMPT targeting LA‐PVJ for patients with AF has high potential to reduce dose to surrounding tissues compared to VMAT or TOMO. Motion mitigation techniques are critical for a particle‐therapy approach.

Rationale and study design for ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation guided by ablation index: a multi-center, prospective randomized trial (PAF-AI trial)

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has become the cornerstone of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, but long-term success rates remains suboptimal, due in large part to late PV reconnection and insufficient ostial substrate modification.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether ablation index (AI)-guided PVI with electrical isolation and quantified ostial substrate modification improves clinical outcomes when compared with contact force (CF)-guided ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF).

METHODS

The PAF-AI trial (ChiCTR1900022041) is a prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled clinical trial enrolling patients with PAF with an indication for catheter ablation. Patients are randomized into a 2:1 fashion to two treatment arms: AI-guided PVI (n = 151) and CF-guided PVI (n = 75). In the AI-guided PVI group, real-time automated display of radiofrequency applications (Visitag™) is used with AI ≥ 500 recommended at the anterior/superior/inferior walls and 350-400 at the posterior wall. In CF-guided PVI group, the value and direction of CF are displayed, with the lesion dots manually annotated. The primary endpoint is the freedom from AF recurrence at 12 months following ablation, without antiarrhythmic drug. The primary pre-specified secondary endpoints include intraprocedural efficiency and peri-procedural complications.

CONCLUSIONS

PAF-AI trial compares the effectiveness and safety of two different strategies of PVI in patients with PAF, AI-guided PVI versus more established CF-guided PVI. This prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled trial, with comparative data evaluating procedural and long-term follow-up results, aims to evaluate the impact of AI-guided strategy on AF ablation compared with the current standard of care RF ablation approach.

Safety and efficacy of the ThermoCool SmartTouch SurroundFlow catheter for atrial fibrillation ablation: A meta-analysis

Background

The ThermoCool Smarttouch Surroundflow catheter (STSFc) is an advanced catheter, which integrating contact force sensing and surroundflow technology. However, comparative data between STSFc and contact force sensing catheter (Thermocool SmartTouch catheter [STc]) are limited.

Hypothesis

We thought that STSFc might bring more clinical benefits. The aim of this meta‐analysis was to compare the safety and efficiency between the STSFc and the STc for treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods

The Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing STSFc and STc.

Results

Four trials involving 727 patients were included in the study. Pool‐analyses demonstrated that, as compared STc ablation, STSFc ablation was more beneficial in terms of procedural times (standard mean difference [SMD]: −0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.37 to −0.07, P = .005) and irrigation fluid volume (SMD: −1.94; 95% CI, −2.65 to −1.22, P < .0001). There was no significant difference between STSFc and STc (risk ratio [RR]: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.21, P = .79) for free from AF. Evidence of complications were low and similar for both groups (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.19‐3.55, P = .80). Additionally, patients administered STSFc ablation tended to have shorter fluoroscopic times (SMD: −0.20; 95% CI, −0.63‐0.23, P = .21).

Conclusions

STSFc ablation was associated with reducing procedural times and irrigation fluid volume. Further, STSFc ablation tended to shorten fluoroscopic times. Therefore, STSFc ablation would be a better choice for AF patients especially in patients with heart failure.