One-year outcomes after pulmonary vein isolation plus posterior wall isolation and additional non-pulmonary vein trigger ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation with or without contact force sensing: a propensity score-matched comparison

2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation

In the last three decades, ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an evidence-based safe and efficacious treatment for managing the most common cardiac arrhythmia. In 2007, the first joint expert consensus document was issued, guiding healthcare professionals involved in catheter or surgical AF ablation. Mounting research evidence and technological advances have resulted in a rapidly changing landscape in the field of catheter and surgical AF ablation, thus stressing the need for regularly updated versions of this partnership which were issued in 2012 and 2017. Seven years after the last consensus, an updated document was considered necessary to define a contemporary framework for selection and management of patients considered for or undergoing catheter or surgical AF ablation. This consensus is a joint effort from collaborating cardiac electrophysiology societies, namely the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Heart Rhythm Society, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society.

2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation

In the last three decades, ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an evidence-based safe and efficacious treatment for managing the most common cardiac arrhythmia. In 2007, the first joint expert consensus document was issued, guiding healthcare professionals involved in catheter or surgical AF ablation. Mounting research evidence and technological advances have resulted in a rapidly changing landscape in the field of catheter and surgical AF ablation, thus stressing the need for regularly updated versions of this partnership which were issued in 2012 and 2017. Seven years after the last consensus, an updated document was considered necessary to define a contemporary framework for selection and management of patients considered for or undergoing catheter or surgical AF ablation. This consensus is a joint effort from collaborating cardiac electrophysiology societies, namely the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific HRS, and the Latin American HRS.

2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation

In the last three decades, ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an evidence-based safe and efficacious treatment for managing the most common cardiac arrhythmia. In 2007, the first joint expert consensus document was issued, guiding healthcare professionals involved in catheter or surgical AF ablation. Mounting research evidence and technological advances have resulted in a rapidly changing landscape in the field of catheter and surgical AF ablation, thus stressing the need for regularly updated versions of this partnership which were issued in 2012 and 2017. Seven years after the last consensus, an updated document was considered necessary to define a contemporary framework for selection and management of patients considered for or undergoing catheter or surgical AF ablation. This consensus is a joint effort from collaborating cardiac electrophysiology societies, namely the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Heart Rhythm Society, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society .

Comparisons of procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes between SMARTTOUCH SURROUNDFLOW catheter and other catheters for atrial fibrillation radiofrequency catheter ablation: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

SMARTTOUCH SURROUNDFLOW (STSF) catheter is the new generation of SMARTTOUCH (ST) catheter with an upgraded irrigation system for radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

This systematic literature review searched the major English and Chinese bibliographic databases from 2016 to 2022 for any original clinical studies assessing the STSF catheter for RFCA in AF patients. Meta-analysis with a random effects model was used for evidence synthesis.

RESULTS

Pooled outcomes from 19 included studies indicated that STSF catheter was associated with a significantly shorter procedure time (weighted mean difference (WMD): -17.4 min, p<0.001), shorter ablation time (WMD: -6.6 min, p<0.001) and lower catheter irrigation fluid volume (WMD: -492.7 mL, p<0.001) than ST catheter. Pooled outcomes from four included studies with paroxysmal AF patients reported that using the STSF catheter for RFCA was associated with a significantly shorter ablation time (WMD: -5.7 min, p<0.001) and a lower risk of 1-year postablation arrhythmia recurrence (rate ratio: 0.504, p<0.001) than the SURROUNDFLOW (SF) catheter. Significant reductions in procedure time and ablation time associated with the STSF catheter were also reported in the other four studies using non-ST/SF catheters as the control. Overall complications of STSF catheter and control catheters were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the STSF catheter was superior to using the ST catheter to conduct RFCA for AF by significantly reducing procedure time, ablation time, fluoroscopy time and irrigation fluid volume. The superiority of the STSF catheter over the SF catheter and other non-ST/SF catheters for RFCA needs further confirmation.

Low voltage-guided ablation of posterior wall improves 5-year arrhythmia-free survival in persistent atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION

The posterior wall (PW) has been proposed as a standard target for ablation beyond pulmonary vein antral isolation (PVI) in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). However, studies have shown inconsistent outcomes with the addition of PW ablation. The presence or absence of low voltage on the PW may explain these inconsistencies. We evaluated whether PW ablation based on the presence or absence of low voltage improves long-term arrhythmia-free outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 5-year follow-up in 152 consecutive patients who received either standard ablation (SA) with PVI alone or PVI + PW ablation (PWA) based on physician discretion (n = 77) or voltage-guided ablation (VGA) with PVI and addition of PWA only if low voltage was present on the PW (n = 75).

RESULTS

The two groups were well matched for baseline characteristics. At 5-year follow-up, 64% of patients receiving VGA were atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT)/AF free compared to 34% receiving SA (HR 0.358 p < .005). PWA had similar AF recurrence in SA and VGA groups (0.30 vs. 0.27 p = .96) but higher AT recurrence when comparing SA and VGA groups (0.39 vs. 0.15 p = .03). In multivariate analysis, both VGA and PWA predicted AF arrhythmia-free survival (HR 0.33, p = .001 and HR 0.20, p = .008, respectively). For AT, VGA predicted arrhythmia-free survival (HR 0.22, p = .028), while PWA predicted AT recurrence (HR 4.704, p = .0219).

CONCLUSION

VGA of the posterior wall ablation beyond PVI in persistent AF significantly improves long-term arrhythmia-free survival when compared with non-voltage-guided ablation. PW ablation without voltage-guidance reduced AF recurrence but at the cost of a higher incidence of AT.

Optimal single procedure strategy of pulmonary vein isolation with cryoballoon or radiofrequency and non-pulmonary vein triggers ablation for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

Background

Limited data exist on pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using cryoballoon (CB) or radiofrequency (RF) ablation and additional non-pulmonary vein trigger ablation for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (non-PAF). We aimed to assess the outcomes of first-stage catheter ablation for non-PAF patients.

Methods

Initial PVI was performed on 734 non-PAF patients (age: 64 ± 10 years; male: 584 (80%)) between September 2014 and June 2018 [315 (43%), CB ablation; 419 (57%), RF catheter]. A logistic regression model was used to match 257 pairs (514 patients) according to the propensity scores (CB or RF group). After PVI, additional non-PV trigger ablation was performed if induced by isoproterenol. We analysed the clinical outcomes of both groups.

Results

The mean procedural time was significantly shorter in the CB group (125 [range, 89–165] min) than in the RF group (190 [160–224] min; P < 0.001). The 1-year Kaplan-Meier event rate revealed similar atrial fibrillation-free survival rates between the two groups (CB: 77.9%, RF: 82.3%; log-rank P = 0.111). The additional ablation percentage for non-PV foci (CB: 39%, RF: 41%; P = 0.653) and complication incidence (CB: 5%, RF: 4%; P = 0.670) were also similar.

Conclusions

In non-PAF patients, the combination strategy of PVI using CB or RF ablation and non-PV trigger ablation achieved comparable outcomes.

Contact-Force Guided Posterior Wall Isolation as an Adjunctive Ablation Strategy for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Background

The efficacy of posterior wall isolation (PWI) on top of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients affected by persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) is still controversial and little is known about the impact of contact-force (CF) technology.

Objective

In this retrospective study, we present our experience with PWI using CF sensing catheters and its efficacy and safety as an adjunctive ablation strategy on top of PVI for management of patients with persistent and longstanding persistent AF.

Methods

A total of 73 consecutive patients (20.5% female) affected by persistent atrial fibrillation (10.9% long-standing) underwent PWI as an adjunctive therapy to PVI using CF sensing catheters. Outcomes were reported as incidence of atrial arrhythmic recurrences (ARs) lasting >30 seconds at follow up and in addition, in patients provided with insertable cardiac monitors (ICM), as burden of AF or atrial tachycardias (AT) at relevant time points.

Results

PWI was successfully achieved in 65 (89.0%) patients. Two (2.7%) minor vascular procedural complications were observed. At 1 and 2-year follow-up, ARs free survival was observed in 80.5% and 64.1% of patients, respectively with 75.3% of patients off antiarrhythmic drugs at the last follow-up. Ten patients underwent repeat ablations during the follow-up. At multivariate analysis, early ARs within 3 months after procedure, were associated with a two-fold increased risk of late ARs at follow-up. Among patients provided with ICM, PWI on top of PVI was able to reduce the mean AT/AF burden of more than 50% compared with pre-ablation time, reporting very low levels (≤ 5%) over 2 years.

Conclusions

In persistent atrial fibrillation, PWI on top of PVI using CF sensing catheters is safe and effective, providing great reduction of burden of ARs. Early ARs are associated with a greater risk of late recurrences.

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with congestive heart failure

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the 1-year success rate of maintaining sinus rhythm after catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with or without congestive heart failure (CHF).

METHODS

In this single-centre retrospective matched-pair cohort study of 3,018 AF patients who underwent initial CA between January 2012 and June 2018, 227 pairs with (CHF group) or without CHF (control group) were matched using propensity scores. In the CHF group, 108 patients were assigned to the arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy (AIC) group whose left ventricular systolic dysfunction was explained only by lasting AF or atrial tachycardia; the remaining 119 had organic heart diseases (non-AIC group). We evaluated the 1-year AF-free survival and changes in clinical findings before and after CA.

RESULTS

The CHF and control groups showed similar AF-free survival; however, AIC patients had significantly better survival than non-AIC patients. AF recurrence was significantly related to CHF re-hospitalisation, which was significantly more frequent in the non-AIC group than in the AIC group. The clinical outcomes of left atrial dilation, brain natriuretic peptide level, and left ventricular ejection function improved significantly before and after CA in both groups. The degree of improvement was significantly better in the AIC group than in the non-AIC group.

CONCLUSIONS

The 1-year success rate was not significantly different between the CHF and control groups. The 1-year success rate in the AIC group was similar to that in the AIC-control group and was better than that in the non-AIC group. CHF clinical outcomes were improved significantly.