Catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation using high-density mapping-guided substrate modification

Pathophysiology and clinical relevance of atrial myopathy

Atrial myopathy is a condition that consists of electrical, structural, contractile, and autonomic remodeling of the atria and is the substrate for development of atrial fibrillation, the most common arrhythmia. Pathophysiologic mechanisms driving atrial myopathy are inflammation, oxidative stress, atrial stretch, and neurohormonal signals, e.g., angiotensin-II and aldosterone. These mechanisms initiate the structural and functional remodeling of the atrial myocardium. Novel therapeutic strategies are being developed that target the pathophysiologic mechanisms of atrial myopathy. In this review, we will discuss the pathophysiology of atrial myopathy, as well as diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of left atrial substrate modification in atrial fibrillation patients with low voltage areas

Background

The left atrial low-voltage areas (LVAs) are associated with atrial fibrosis; however, it is not clear how the left atrial LVAs affect the recurrence of arrhythmias after catheter ablation, and the efficacy and safety of the left atrial substrate modification based on LVAs as a strategy for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) are not evident for AF patients with LVAs.

Methods

We performed a systematic search to compare the arrhythmia recurrence in AF patients with and without LVAs after conventional ablation and arrhythmia recurrence in LVAs patients after conventional ablation with and without substrate modification based on LVAs.

Result

A total of 6 studies were included, involving 1,175 patients. The arrhythmia recurrence was higher in LVA patients after conventional ablation (OR: 5.14, 95% CI: [3.11, 8.49]; P < 0.00001). Additional LVAs substrate modification could improve the freedom of arrhythmia in LVAs patients after the first procedure (OR: 0.30, 95% CI: [0.15, 0.62]; P = 0.0009). However, there was no significant difference after multiple procedures (P = 0.19). The procedure time (MD: 26.61, 95% CI [15.79, 37.42]; P < 0.00001) and fluoroscopy time (MD: 6.90, 95% CI [4.34, 9.47]; P < 0.00001) in LVAs patients with additional LVAs substrate modification were significantly increased compared to LVAs patients’ without substrate modification. Nevertheless, there were no higher LVAs substrate modification-related complications (P = 0.93) between LVAs patients with and without additional LVAs substrate modification. In the subgroup analysis, the additional LVAs substrate modification reduced the risk of arrhythmia recurrence in LVAs patients during the follow-up time, which was 12 months (OR: 0.32, 95% CI (0.17, 0.58); P = 0.002), and box isolation (OR: 0.37, 95% CI (0.20, 0.69); P = 0.002) subgroups, but the type of AF, follow up >12 months and homogenization subgroups were not statistically significant. Trial sequential analysis shows conclusive evidence for the LVAs ablation.

Conclusion

This study has shown that LVAs could improve the risk of arrhythmia recurrence in AF patients after conventional ablation. And additional LVAs substrate modification after conventional ablation could increase the freedom of arrhythmia recurrence in LVAs patients. Interestingly, the box isolation approach appeared more promising.

Systematic review registration

[http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero], identifier [CRD42021239277].

Atrial Myopathy Underlying Atrial Fibrillation

While AF most often occurs in the setting of atrial disease, current assessment and treatment of patients with AF does not focus on the extent of the atrial myopathy that serves as the substrate for this arrhythmia. Atrial myopathy, in particular atrial fibrosis, may initiate a vicious cycle in which atrial myopathy leads to AF, which in turn leads to a worsening myopathy. Various techniques, including ECG, plasma biomarkers, electroanatomical voltage mapping, echocardiography, and cardiac MRI, can help to identify and quantify aspects of the atrial myopathy. Current therapies, such as catheter ablation, do not directly address the underlying atrial myopathy. There is emerging research showing that by targeting this myopathy we can help decrease the occurrence and burden of AF.

Additional Low-Voltage-Area Ablation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Results of the Randomized Controlled VOLCANO Trial

Background The efficacy of low-voltage-area (LVA) ablation has not been well determined. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of LVA ablation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation on rhythm outcomes in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and Results VOLCANO (Catheter Ablation Targeting Low-Voltage Areas After Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Patients) trial included paroxysmal AF patients undergoing initial AF ablation. Of 398 patients in whom a left atrial voltage map was obtained after pulmonary vein isolation, 336 (85%) had no LVA (group A). The remaining 62 (15%) patients with LVAs were randomly allocated to undergo LVA ablation (group B, n=30) or not (group C, n=32) in a 1:1 fashion. Primary end point was 1-year AF-recurrence-free survival rate. No adverse events related to LVA ablation occurred. Procedural (124±40 versus 95±33 minutes, P=0.003) and fluoroscopic times (29±11 versus 24±8 minutes, P=0.034) were longer in group B than group C. Patients with LVAs demonstrated lower AF-recurrence-free survival rates (88%) than those without LVA (B, 57%, P<0.0001; C, 53%, P<0.0001). However, LVA ablation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation did not impact AF-recurrence-free survival rate (group B versus C, P=0.67). Conclusions The presence of LVA was a strong predictor of AF recurrence after pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal AF. However, LVA ablation had no beneficial impact on 1-year rhythm outcomes. Registration URL: https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr; Unique identifier: UMIN000023403.