Comparison of higher-power and conventional power ablation of atrial fibrillation using contact force-sensing catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A novel stepwise catheter ablation method of the mitral isthmus for persistent atrial fibrillation: efficacy and reproducibility

BACKGROUND

Ethanol infusion of the vein of Marshall (EI-VOM) has been widely used to facilitate mitral isthmus (MI) ablation. According to the literature, the success rate of achieving a bidirectional conduction block across the MI ranges from 51 to 96%, with no standardized strategy or method available for cardiac electrophysiologists.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to introduce and evaluate a novel ablation method of MI.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) that underwent catheter ablation were included. The MI ablation procedure followed a stepwise approach. In step 1, ethanol infusion of the vein of Marshall (EI-VOM) was performed. In step 2, a "V-shape" endocardial linear ablation connecting the left inferior pulmonary vein (LIPV) to mitral annulus (MA) was performed. In step 3, earliest activation sites(EASs) near the ablation line were identified using activation mapping followed by reinforced ablation. In step 4, precise epicardial ablation was performed, with the catheter introduced into the coronary sinus(CS) to target key ablation targets (KATs).

RESULTS

135 patients with PeAF underwent catheter ablation with the stepwise ablation method adopted in 119 cases. Bidirectional conduction blocks were achieved in 117 patients (98.3%). The block rates of every step were 0%, 58.0%, 44.0%, and 92.9%, and the cumulative block rates for the four steps were 0%, 58.0%, 76.5%, and 98.3%, respectively. No patient experienced fatal complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Our novel stepwise catheter ablation method for MI yielded a high bidirectional block rate with high reproducibility.

Outcomes of catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent data have shown an advantage of rhythm control over rate control for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, the data regarding efficacy of catheter ablation (CA) compared with antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with AF is lacking. Therefore, we sought to evaluate recurrence of arrhythmia, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular deaths, stroke/TIA, and all-cause readmissions of CA compared with AAD in patients with AF.

METHODS

Systematically searched through PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and Cochrane for randomized control trials that compared CA and AAD in atrial fibrillation patients. Review Manager 5.4 and OpenMetaAnalyst were used to analyze the data. Data was pooled for the outcomes using random-effect models (DerSimonian and Laird) and reported as pooled odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

A total of 4822 patients were included. The CA group had 2417 patients while the AAD group included 2405 patients. Pooled data demonstrated that the CA arm had a statistically significant decrease in risk for recurrence of arrhythmia as compared to AAD (OR 0.25; [95% CI, 0.18-0.36]; p < 0.001). All-cause readmission was statistically significantly lower in CA as compared to AAD (OR 0.33; [95%CI, 0.17-0.63]; p < 0.001). For other secondary outcomes, there was no statistically significant difference between CA and AAD with regard to all-cause mortality (OR 0.75; [95% CI, 0.55-1.03]), cardiovascular death (OR 0.76; [95% CI, 0.22-2.54]), bleeding (OR 1.09, [95% CI 0.74, 1.61]), or stroke/TIA outcome (OR 0.90, [95% CI, 0.59-1.37]).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of pooled data from 16 RCTs, CA utilization for atrial fibrillation had improved freedom from arrhythmia as well as reduced all-cause readmission compared with AAD.

Ablation index-guided high-power ablation for superior vena cava isolation in patients with atrial fibrillation

Background

The strategy of ablation index (AI)-guided high-power ablation seems to be a novel strategy for performing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). An AI-guided high-power ablation strategy was used in this study to determine whether superior vena cava isolation (SVCI) after PVI was feasible and safe for patients with AF.

Methods

Data from 53 patients with AF were collected. Mapping and ablation of SVC were performed. The applied power was set at 45 W and the procedure was guided by AI. The SVC was divided into six segments in a cranial view. The RF applications and AI values in different segments were compared and analyzed. Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, the diagnostic accuracy of AI value for predicting segment block was evaluated.

Results

Electrical SVCIs were successfully achieved in all patients. SVCI was performed by segment ablation in most cases, with RF applications in different segments. The mean AI value in non-lateral walls was higher than that of the lateral wall (392 ± 28 vs. 371 ± 37, P < 0.001). Acutely blocked sites had significantly larger AI values compared with no-blocked sites (390 ± 30 vs. 343 ± 23, P < 0.001). The optimal AI cut-off value for non-lateral segments was 379 (sensitivity: 75.9%, specificity: 100%) and for lateral segments was 345 (sensitivity: 82.3%, specificity: 100%).

Conclusion

The AI values were predictive of the acute conduction block of SVCI. With AI values of 345 and 379, respectively, conduction block was achieved in the lateral walls at a lower level than in the non-lateral walls.

Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety between High-Power Short-Duration Ablation and Conventional Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aim. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety between high-power short-duration (HPSD) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and conventional RFA in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods. Studies comparing HPSD and traditional applications in patients undergoing initial catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation from inception through December 2021 were searched on Pubmed, Medline, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Results. The meta-analysis included seventeen studies with a total of 4934 patients. HPSD group decreased procedure duration (mean difference (MD) −38.28 min, $P<0.001$ ), RF duration (MD −20.51 min, $P<0.001$ ), fluoroscopy duration (MD −5.19 min, $P<0.001$ ), and acute pulmonary vein reconnection (Odds ratio (OR) 0.40, $P<0.001$ ), while improving the freedom from atrial arrhythmia at one year (OR 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12–1.94, $P=0.005$ ) and rates of first-pass isolation (OR 8.92, $P=0.001$ ). Compared with the conventional group, freedom from atrial arrhythmia at one-year follow-up was higher in the HPSD group without the guidance of AI/LSI (OR 1.66, $P=0.01$ ) and studies with a power setting of 40–50 W (OR 1.93, $P=0.002$ ). Nevertheless, the two groups had similar effectiveness with a power setting of 50 W in the HPSD RFA (OR 1.10, $P=0.52$ ). There was no difference in complications between the two groups ( $P=0.71$ ). Conclusion. HPSD RFA was associated with shorter procedure duration, higher freedom from atrial arrhythmia, and comparable safety compared to conventional RFA.