Interpretation of clinical studies in electrophysiology: statistical considerations for the clinician

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.

The impact of age on ablation outcomes in AF-mediated cardiomyopathy

INTRODUCTION

The absence of ventricular scar in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and systolic heart failure (HF) predicts left ventricular (LV) recovery following AF ablation. It is unknown whether age impacts the degree of LV recovery, reverse remodeling, or AF recurrence following catheter ablation (CA) among this population.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of age on LV recovery and AF recurrence in a population with AF and systolic HF without fibrosis (termed AF-mediated cardiomyopathy) following CA.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing CA between 2013 and 2021 with LV ejection fraction (LVEF) < 45% and absence of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) detected LV myocardial fibrosis were stratified by age (<65 vs. ≥65 years). Following CA, participants underwent remote rhythm monitoring for 12 months with repeat CMR for HF surveillance.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 70 patients (10% female, mean LVEF 33 ± 9%), stratified into younger (age < 65 years, 63%) and older (age ≥ 65 years, 37%) cohorts. Baseline comorbidities, LVEF (34 ± 9 vs. 33 ± 8 ≥65 years, p = .686), atrial and ventricular dimensions (left atrial volume index: 55 ± 21 vs. 56 ± 14 mL/m2 age ≥ 65, p = .834; indexed left ventricular end-diastolic volume: 108 ± 40 vs. 104 ± 28 mL/m2 age ≥ 65, p = .681), pharmacotherapy and ablation strategy (pulmonary vein isolation in all; posterior wall isolation in 27% vs. 19% age ≥ 65, p = .448; cavotricuspid isthmus in 9% vs. 11.5% age ≥ 65) were comparable (all p > .05) albeit a higher CHADS2 VASc score in the older cohort (2.7 ± 0.9 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6 age < 65, p < .001).   Freedom from AF was comparable (hazard ratio: 0.65, 95% confidence interval: 0.38-1.48, LogRank p = .283) as was AF burden [0% (interquartile range, IQR: 0.0-2.1) vs. age ≥ 65: [0% (IQR 0.0-1.7), p = .516], irrespective of age. There was a significant improvement in LV systolic function in both groups (ΔLVEF + 21 ± 14% vs. +21 ± 12% age ≥ 65, p = .913), with LV recovery in the vast majority (73% vs. 69%, respectively, p = .759) at 13 (IQR: 12-16) months. This was accompanied by comparable improvements in functional status (New York Heart Association class p = .851; 6-min walk distance 50 ± 61 vs. 93 ± 134 m in age ≥ 65, p = .066), biomarkers (ΔN-terminal-pro brain natriuretic peptide -139 ± 246 vs. -168 ± 181 age ≥ 65,p = .629) and HF symptoms (Short Form-36 survey Δphysical component summary p = .483/Δmental component summary, p = .841).

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing CA for AF with systolic HF in the absence of ventricular scar, comparable improvements in ventricular function, symptoms, and freedom from AF are achieved irrespective of age.

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently develop atrial fibrillation (AF). There are no randomized trials examining the effects of AF ablation on HFpEF outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to compare the effects of AF ablation vs usual medical therapy on markers of HFpEF severity, including exercise hemodynamics, natriuretic peptide levels, and patient symptoms.

METHODS

Patients with concomitant AF and HFpEF underwent exercise right heart catheterization and cardiopulmonary exercise testing. HFpEF was confirmed with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) of 15 mm Hg at rest or ≥25 mm Hg on exercise. Patients were randomized to AF ablation vs medical therapy, with investigations repeated at 6 months. The primary outcome was change in peak exercise PCWP on follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients (mean age: 66.1 years; 51.6% females, 80.6% persistent AF) were randomized to AF ablation (n = 16) vs medical therapy (n = 15). Baseline characteristics were comparable across both groups. At 6 months, ablation reduced the primary outcome of peak PCWP from baseline (30.4 ± 4.2 to 25.4 ± 4.5 mm Hg; P < 0.01). Improvements were also seen in peak relative VO2 (20.2 ± 5.9 to 23.1 ± 7.2 mL/kg/min; P < 0.01), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels (794 ± 698 to 141 ± 60 ng/L; P = 0.04), and MLHF (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure) score (51 ± -21.9 to 16.6 ± 17.5; P < 0.01). No differences were detected in the medical arm. Following ablation, 50% no longer met exercise right heart catheterization-based criteria for HFpEF vs 7% in the medical arm (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

AF ablation improves invasive exercise hemodynamic parameters, exercise capacity, and quality of life in patients with concomitant AF and HFpEF.

Effect of Catheter Ablation Using Pulmonary Vein Isolation With vs Without Posterior Left Atrial Wall Isolation on Atrial Arrhythmia Recurrence in Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: The CAPLA Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone is less effective in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) compared with paroxysmal AF. The left atrial posterior wall may contribute to maintenance of persistent AF, and posterior wall isolation (PWI) is a common PVI adjunct. However, PWI has not been subjected to randomized comparison.

OBJECTIVE

To compare PVI with PWI vs PVI alone in patients with persistent AF undergoing first-time catheter ablation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Investigator initiated, multicenter, randomized clinical trial involving 11 centers in 3 countries (Australia, Canada, UK). Symptomatic patients with persistent AF were randomized 1:1 to either PVI with PWI or PVI alone. Patients were enrolled July 2018-March 2021, with 1-year follow-up completed March 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

The PVI with PWI group (n = 170) underwent wide antral pulmonary vein isolation followed by posterior wall isolation involving linear ablation at the roof and floor to achieve electrical isolation. The PVI-alone group (n = 168) underwent wide antral pulmonary vein isolation alone.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary end point was freedom from any documented atrial arrhythmia of more than 30 seconds without antiarrhythmic medication at 12 months, after a single ablation procedure. The 23 secondary outcomes included freedom from atrial arrhythmia with/without antiarrhythmic medication after multiple procedures, freedom from symptomatic AF with/without antiarrhythmic medication after multiple procedures, AF burden between study groups at 12 months, procedural outcomes, and complications.

RESULTS

Among 338 patients randomized (median age, 65.6 [IQR, 13.1] years; 76.9% men), 330 (97.6%) completed the study. After 12 months, 89 patients (52.4%) assigned to PVI with PWI were free from recurrent atrial arrhythmia without antiarrhythmic medication after a single procedure, compared with 90 (53.6%) assigned to PVI alone (between-group difference, -1.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.73-1.36]; P = .98). Of the secondary end points, 9 showed no significant difference, including freedom from atrial arrhythmia with/without antiarrhythmic medication after multiple procedures (58.2% for PVI with PWI vs 60.1% for PVI alone; HR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.79-1.55]; P = .57), freedom from symptomatic AF with/without antiarrhythmic medication after multiple procedures (68.2% vs 72%; HR, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.80-1.78]; P = .36) or AF burden (0% [IQR, 0%-2.3%] vs 0% [IQR, 0%-2.8%], P = .47). Mean procedural times (142 [SD, 69] vs 121 [SD, 57] minutes, P < .001) and ablation times (34 [SD, 21] vs 28 [SD, 12] minutes, P < .001) were significantly shorter for PVI alone. There were 6 complications for PVI with PWI and 4 for PVI alone.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In patients undergoing first-time catheter ablation for persistent AF, the addition of PWI to PVI alone did not significantly improve freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 12 months compared with PVI alone. These findings do not support the empirical inclusion of PWI for ablation of persistent AF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12616001436460.

Catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation: A multicenter randomized trial of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) versus PVI with posterior left atrial wall isolation (PWI) - The CAPLA study

BACKGROUND

The success of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is reduced in persistent AF (PsAF) compared to paroxysmal AF. Adjunctive ablation strategies have failed to show consistent incremental benefit over PVI alone in randomized studies. The left atrial posterior wall is a potential source of non-PV triggers and atrial substrate which may promote the initiation and maintenance of PsAF. Adding posterior wall isolation (PWI) to PVI had shown conflicting outcomes, with earlier studies confounded by methodological limitations.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether combining PWI with PVI significantly improves freedom from AF recurrence, compared to PVI alone, in patients with PsAF.

METHODS

This is a multi-center, prospective, international randomized clinical trial. 338 patients with symptomatic PsAF refractory to anti-arrhythmic therapy (AAD) will be randomized to either PVI alone or PVI with PWI in a 1:1 ratio. PVI involves wide antral circumferential pulmonary vein (PV) isolation, utilizing contact force sensing ablation catheters. PWI involves the creation of a floor line connecting the inferior aspect of the PVs, and a roof line connecting the superior aspect of the PVs. Follow up is for a minimum of 12 months with rhythm monitoring via implantable cardiac device and/or loop monitor, or frequent intermittent monitoring with an ECG device. The primary outcome is freedom from any documented atrial arrhythmia of > 30 seconds off AAD at 12 months, after a single ablation procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized study aims to determine the success and safety of adjunctive PWI to PVI in patients with persistent AF.