Head-to-head comparison of acute and chronic pulmonary vein stenosis for cryoballoon versus radiofrequency ablation

Stiff left atrial syndrome with pulmonary veins occlusion after percutaneous radiofrequency ablation: a life-long complication that can lead to heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

Stiff left atrial syndrome (SLAS) and pulmonary vein (PV) occlusion are rare yet potentially major life-long complications after radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation. While mostly controlled by medical management, SLAS can progress to refractory congestive heart failure. Treatment of PV stenosis and occlusion remains a challenging problem with ongoing risk for recurrence regardless of techniques employed. Herein we present the case of a now 51-year-old male with acquired PV occlusion and SLAS who, over the course of eleven years, despite multiple interventions, ultimately required heart transplantation.

CASE PRESENTATION

After undergoing three radiofrequency catheter procedures for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), a hybrid ablation was planned due to reappearance of symptomatic AF. Preoperative echocardiography and chest computed tomography (CT) revealed an occlusion of both left PVs. Furthermore, left atrial dysfunction, high pulmonary artery and pulmonary wedge pressures were diagnosed as well as an important reduction of the left atrial volume. The diagnosis of stiff left atrial syndrome was made. Primary surgical repair of the left-sided PVs was performed using a pericardial patch as a tubular neo-vein, combined with cryoablation in the left and right atrium to treat the patient's arrhythmia. Initial results were favorable, however, after two years the patient experienced progressive restenosis with hemoptysis. Therefore, stenting of the common left PV was performed. Over the years, progressive right heart failure with severe tricuspid regurgitation developed, despite maximal medical therapy, which led to the need for heart transplantation.

CONCLUSION

The impact of PV occlusion and SLAS after percutaneous radiofrequency ablation can be lifelong and devastating for the clinical course of the patient. Since the presence of a small left atrium could be an important predictor for SLAS in case of redo ablation, preprocedural imaging should guide the operator to an algorithm of a decision-making containing lesion set, energy source, and safety of re-ablation.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Direct Comparison of Second-Generation Cryoballoon Ablation and Contact Force-Sensing Radiofrequency Ablation in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation

The superiority of second-generation cryoballoon (2G-CB) ablation versus contact force-sensing radiofrequency (CF-RF) ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) was assessed in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATAs) (OR = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68 to 1.17; p = 0.41), freedom from AF (OR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.65 to 1.35; p = 0.72), and acute pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) (OR = 1.17; 95% CI = 0.54 to 2.53; p = 0.70) between 2G-CB ablation and CF-RF ablation were not different. The procedure time for the 2G-CB ablation was shorter (MD = −18.78 min; 95% CI = −27.72 to −9.85 min; p < 0.01), while the fluoroscopy time was similar (MD = 2.66 min; 95% CI = −0.52 to 5.83 min; p = 0.10). In the 2G-CB ablation group, phrenic nerve paralysis was more common (OR = 5.74; 95% CI = 1.80 to 18.31; p = < 0.01). Regarding freedom from ATAs, freedom from AF, and acute PVI, these findings imply that 2G-CB ablation is not superior to CF-RF ablation in paroxysmal AF. Although faster than CF-RF ablation, 2G-CB ablation has a greater risk of phrenic nerve paralysis.

Second-generation cryoballoon versus contact force radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis of evidence from randomized controlled trials

Catheter ablation has been recommended for patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF), with pulmonary vein isolation being the cornerstone of the ablation procedure. Newly developed technologies, such as cryoballoon ablation with a second-generation cryoballoon (CB2) and the contact force radiofrequency (CF-RF) ablation, have been introduced in recent years to overcome the shortcomings of the widely used RF ablation approach. However, high-quality results comparing CB2 and CF-RF remain controversial. Thus, we conducted this meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety between CB2 and CF-RF using evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Databases including Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched from their date of inception to January 2021. Only RCTs that met the inclusion criteria were included for analysis. The primary outcome of interest was freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) during follow-up. Secondary outcomes included procedure-related complications, procedure time and fluoroscopy time. Six RCTs with a total of 987 patients were finally enrolled. No significant differences were found between CB2 and CF-RF in terms of freedom from AT (relative risk [RR] = 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-1.14, p = 0.616) or total procedural-related complications (RR = 1.25, 95% CI 0.69-2.27, p = 0.457). CB2 treatment was associated with a significantly higher risk of phrenic nerve palsy (PNP) than CF-RF (RR = 4.93, 95% CI 1.12-21.73, p = 0.035). The occurrences of pericardial effusion/tamponade and vascular complications were comparable between the CB2 and CF-RF treatments (RR = 0.41, p = 0.398; RR = 0.82, p = 0.632). In addition, CB2 treatment had a significantly shorter procedure time than CF-RF (weighted mean difference [WMD] = - 20.75 min, 95% CI - 25.44 ~ - 16.05 min, P < 0.001), whereas no difference was found in terms of fluoroscopy time (WMD = 4.63 min, p = 0.179). CB2 and CF-RF treatment are comparable for AF patients regarding freedom from AT and procedure-related complications. Compared to CF-RF, CB2 treatment was associated with a shorter procedure time but a higher incidence of PNP. Further large-scale studies are warranted to compare these two techniques and provide an up-to-date recommendation.

Does atrial fibrillation ablation worsen preexisting anemia? Another anemia paradox in DOAC era

BACKGROUND

There is a concern about worsening anemia after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in anemic patients. We aimed to clarify whether or not patients with anemia who are on an oral anticoagulant therapy are more likely to lose blood after AF ablation.

METHODS

We studied AF patients in 3 cardiovascular centers who skipped a single dose of a direct oral anticoagulant prior to the ablation, and compared the drop in the hemoglobin level 24 hours after the procedure and bleeding complications between the patients with and without preexisting anemia.

RESULTS

We identified 183 (15.7%) patients with anemia at baseline out of 1163 patients. The reduction in the hemoglobin level (-0.39±0.71 vs. -0.93±0.9 g/dL; p<0.001) was smaller in the anemic than non-anemic patients. A fall in the hemoglobin level of ≥2 g/dL, which is a guideline-defined significant hemoglobin drop, was less common in anemic patients (1.6% vs. 11.3%; p<0.001). A female gender [odds ratio (OR) 1.62, confidence interval (CI) 1.07-2.45; p=0.02], persistent or long-standing persistent versus paroxysmal AF (OR 1.67, CI 1.13-2.49; p=0.01), ORBIT score ≥3 (OR 3.5, CI 1.34-8.94; p=0.01), and preexisting anemia (OR 0.02, CI 0.004-0.14; p<0.001) were independently associated with the fall in the hemoglobin level of ≥2 g/dL. No difference was noted in the rate of major bleeding complications (1.6% vs. 1.2%; p=0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

Paradoxically, patients with preexisting anemia may be less likely to lose blood following AF ablation.

Second-generation cryoballoon vs. contact-force sensing radiofrequency catheter ablation in atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

It is imperative to understand the influence of second-generation cryoballoon (CB-2) and contact-force sensing radiofrequency ablation (CF-RF) on clinical outcomes in atrial fibrillation (AF). This updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examined the efficacy and safety of CB-2 vs. CF-RF in patients with AF.

METHODS

RCTs on the use of CB-2 vs. CF-RF in patients with AF were included. The primary outcome was the recurrence of AF, and the key secondary outcomes included serious complications, acute pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), procedure duration, and fluoroscopy time.

RESULTS

A total of 261 articles were identified, and five studies with a total of 845 participants were included in the study. A total of 93% of participants had paroxysmal AF, 7% of participants had persistent AF, and none of participants had permanent AF. There were 499 participants in the CB-2 arm and 346 in the CF-RF arm. AF recurrence was comparable in the CB-2 group (30.3%) and the CF-RF group (29.2%) (OR = 0.93; 95%CI = 0.56-1.54; P = 0.79; I² = 48%). There were no statistical differences in acute PVI (P = 0.92; I² = 0%) and serious complications (P = 0.87; I² = 47%) between the two groups. The procedure duration was shorter in the CB-2 group than in the CF-RF group (MD = - 13.39; 95%CI = - 15.58, - 7.19; P < 0.0001; I² = 59%).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that CB-2 and CF-RF had comparable recurrences of AF and similar incidences of serious complications in AF patients during the ablation process.

Comparative efficacy and safety of catheter ablation interventions for atrial fibrillation: comprehensive network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Point-by-point radiofrequency (RF) ablation has been the cornerstone of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); however, it remains a complex and time-consuming procedure. Many novel AF catheter ablation (CA) techniques have been introduced, but whether they represent valuable alternatives remains controversial. Thus, we conducted a network meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of different CA interventions.

METHODS

We systematically searched several databases (Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov ) from inception to March, 2020. The primary outcomes of interest were freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) and procedure-related complications; secondary outcomes included procedure time and fluoroscopy time.

RESULTS

Finally, 33 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 4801 patients were enrolled. No significant differences were found among the different interventions in terms of primary efficacy or safety outcomes. PVAC was most likely to have the shortest procedure time (Prbest = 61.5%) and nMARQ the shortest fluoroscopy time (Prbest = 60.6%); compared with conventional irrigated RF (IRF) ablation, cryoballoon ablation (CBA) showed comparable clinical efficacy and safety; CBA with second-generation CB (CB2) had a significantly shorter procedure time than IRF with contact force technology (CF-IRF) (WMD = - 20.75; p = 0.00).

CONCLUSION

There is insufficient evidence to suggest that one CA technique is superior to another. However, PVAC may be associated with a shorter procedural duration, and the CB2 catheters also seemed to reduce the procedure time compared with that of CF-IRF. Further large-scale studies are warranted to compare the available CA techniques and provide an up-to-date optimum recommendation.

Intra-procedural anticoagulation and post-procedural hemoglobin fall in atrial fibrillation ablation with minimally interrupted direct oral anticoagulants: comparisons across 4 drugs

PURPOSE

Thromboembolic or hemorrhagic complications related to atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation are rare, and thus, it is difficult to compare their frequency across different direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). We aimed to compare the intra-ablation blood coagulability and post-procedural hemoglobin fall as alternatives to those complications across 4 DOACs.

METHODS

We enrolled AF patients younger than 65 years old in 3 cardiovascular centers who skipped a single dose of apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban, prior to the ablation. Endpoints included the activated clotting time (ACT), heparin requirement during the ablation, and drop in the hemoglobin level 24 h after the procedure.

RESULTS

The time-course curves of the ACT differed significantly across the patients with apixaban (N = 113), dabigatran (N = 130), edoxaban (N = 144), and rivaroxaban (N = 81), with its highest level in the dabigatran group (P < 0.001). The average ACT was greater in the dabigatran group than in the other groups (312.3 ± 34, 334.4 ± 44, 308.1 ± 41, and 305.8 ± 34.7 s; P < 0.001). A significant difference was noted in total heparin requirement across the patient groups (3990.2 ± 1167.9, 3890.4 ± 955.3, 4423.8 ± 1051.6, and 3972 ± 978.7 U/m²/h; P < 0.001), with its greatest amount in the edoxaban group. The reduction in the hemoglobin level was similar (- 0.93 ± 0.92, - 0.88 ± 0.79, - 0.89 ± 0.97, - 0.95 ± 1.23 g/dL; P = 0.94). No inter-group difference was noted in the rate of major or minor bleedings (0.9%, 2.3%, 1.4%, and 3.7%; P = 0.51), and no thromboembolic events were encountered.

CONCLUSION

A difference in DOACs may have an impact on intra-ablation anticoagulation; however, it may not be on the procedural blood loss in the setting of a single skip.

Meta-Analysis Comparing Cryoballoon Versus Radiofrequency as First Ablation Procedure for Atrial Fibrillation

Pulmonary vein isolation is the cornerstone of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Radiofrequency (RF) represents a standard of care for pulmonary vein isolation, whereas cryoballoon (CB) ablation has emerged as a valid alternative. The aim of our meta-analysis was to explore the efficacy and safety of CB compared with RF as first ablation procedure for AF. We searched the literature for studies that investigated this issue. The primary efficacy outcome was AF recurrence. The safety outcomes were: pericardial effusion, cardiac tamponade, phrenic nerve palsy, vascular complications, and major bleedings. Fourteen randomized controlled studies and 34 observational studies were included in the analysis. A total of 7,951 patients underwent CB ablation, whereas 9,641 received RF ablation. Mean follow-up was 14 ± 7 months. Overall, CB reduced the incidence of AF recurrence compared with RF ablation (relative risk [RR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78 to 0.94; p = 0.001), and this result was consistent across different study design and AF type. CB had a significantly higher rate of phrenic nerve palsy, whereas it was related to a lower incidence of pericardial effusion, cardiac tamponade (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.88; p = 0.011) and vascular complications (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77; p <0.001) compared with RF. There was no significant difference in major bleedings between the 2 strategies. CB ablation had a shorter procedural time compared with RF (mean difference -20.76 minutes; p <0.001). In conclusion, considered its efficacy/safety profile and short procedural time, CB ablation represents the preferable option for first AF ablation procedure.

Management of arrhythmia recurrence in patients with pulmonary vein stenosis following atrial fibrillation ablation

AIMS

Arrhythmia recurrence is a common clinical problem in patients with pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS) following catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. The study sought to analyse the management of arrhythmia recurrence in patients with PVS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Retrospective analysis was performed on 29 patients with high-degree PVS. Follow-up contained clinical visits, Holter-electrocardiogram recordings and invasive pulmonary vein (PV) angiography and electrophysiological studies. Arrhythmia recurrence was observed in 18 patients (62%) after PVS formation. Fifteen of 18 patients (83.3%) with and 1 of 11 patients (9.1%) without arrhythmia recurrence had electrical PV reconnection (P = 0.0003). In 14 of 16 patients repeat pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was conducted (radiofrequency ablation in 12 and cryoballoon ablation in 2 cases). Repeat PVI was successful in all PVs in nine patients and incomplete in five patients (failed attempt in two patients with stent implantation, no attempt in three patients with stenotic PVs). Freedom from arrhythmia recurrence was estimated at 56.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 36.4-72.0%] after 24 months. At the end of the follow-up, complete PVI was documented in 19 of 23 patients (82.6%) with stable sinus rhythm and in 2 of 6 patients with arrhythmia recurrence (33.3%) (P = 0.0335). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of recurrence-free survival of restenosis after interventional PVS treatment was similar in patients without and with repeat ablation [75.6% (95% CI 57.0-94.3%) and 67.0% (95% CI 43.2-90.7%) after 500 days, P = 0.77].

CONCLUSIONS

Pulmonary vein reconnection is the major driver of arrhythmia recurrence in PVS patients. Repeat PVI is feasible and does not lead to progression of PVS or restenosis if the procedure is carefully performed.