Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in elderly patients: Systematic review and a meta-analysis

Extensive ablation for elderly patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: insights from the EARNEST-PVI prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

In patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), extensive ablation for substrate modification, such as linear ablation or complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains controversial. Previous studies investigating extensive ablation have demonstrated its varying efficacy, suggesting the possible heterogeneity of its efficacy. Aging is a major risk factor for AF and is associated with atrial remodeling. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the extensive ablation strategy compared with PVI alone strategy between young and elderly patients.

METHODS

This study is a post-hoc analysis of the multicenter, randomized controlled, noninferiority trial investigating the efficacy and safety of PVI-only (PVI-alone arm) compared with extensive ablation (PVI-plus arm) in patients with persistent AF (EARNEST-PVI trial). We divided the overall population into 2 groups based on age and assessed treatment effects.

RESULTS

In the young group (age < 65 years, N = 206), there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate between the PVI-alone group and PVI-plus group [hazard ratio (HR): 1.00, 95%CI: 0.57-1.73, p = 0.987], whereas the recurrence rate was significantly lower in the PVI-plus group compared to the PVI-alone group in the elderly group (age ≥ 65 years, N = 291) (HR: 0.47, 95%CI: 0.29-0.76, p = 0.0021) (p for interaction = 0.0446). There were no fatal procedural complications.

CONCLUSION

In patients with persistent AF, the extensive ablation strategy was more effective than the PVI-alone strategy in elderly patients, while the effectiveness of both approaches was comparable in young patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03514693. URL: https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000022454 Unique ID issued by UMIN: UMIN000019449.

Safety and efficacy of pulsed-field ablation for atrial fibrillation in the elderly: A EU-PORIA sub-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of catheter ablation in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) demonstrates a favorable clinical profile, however, data on elderly patients are lacking.

AIMS

We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of PFA in the elderly, using data from the EU-PORIA registry.

METHODS

Periprocedural complications and long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of AF ablation using the pentaspline PFA catheter (Farapulse™) were compared between patients older than 80 years old and their younger counterparts, across seven European centers.

RESULTS

Among the 1233 patients in the registry, 88 (7.1 %) were older than 80 years. Elderly patients were more often females (51.1 % vs 37.8 %, p = 0.01) with a lower median BMI (26.0, IQR:23.5-29.2 vs 26.9, IQR:24.4-30.4 kg/m2, p = 0.02), a higher median CHA2DS2-VASc score (4, IQR:3-5 vs 2, IQR:1-3, p < 0.001) and a higher incidence of hypertension (73.9 % vs 52.7 %, p < 0.001). In both groups, most patients had paroxysmal AF (58.0 % vs 60.3 %, p = 0.65). Ablation in the elderly was more frequently performed with minimally interrupted anticoagulation (87.5 % vs 59.7 %, p < 0.001). Despite comparable rates of overall complications (5.7 % vs 3.5 %, p = 0.29), elderly patients had a higher incidence of stroke (2.3 % vs 0.3 %, p = 0.04). At 12 months, major adverse clinical events (4.5 % vs. 2.1 %, p = 0.12) and arrhythmia-free survival (70 % vs 74 %, p = 0.69) were comparable in both groups. None of the recurrence-free elderly patients were on antiarrhythmic drugs at the end of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In this real-world cohort, the efficacy of PFA for AF was similar in elderly and younger patients. Despite comparable complication rates, a higher incidence of stroke was observed in the elderly.

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.

Cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation in octogenarians: one year outcomes from the cryo global registry

BACKGROUND

Limited information is available on the safety and efficacy of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Moreover, global utilization of CBA in this population (≥ 80 years old) has not been reported. This study's objectives were to determine the use, efficacy, and safety of CBA to treat octogenarians suffering from AF.

METHODS

In this sub-analysis of the Cryo Global Registry, 12-month outcomes of treating AF via CBA in octogenarians were compared to patients < 80 years old. Efficacy was evaluated as time to a ≥ 30 s atrial arrhythmia (AA) recurrence. Healthcare utilization was determined via repeat ablations and hospitalizations. Improvement upon disease burden was evaluated through patient reporting of symptoms and the EQ-5D-3L quality of life (QoL) survey.

RESULTS

The octogenarian cohort (n = 101) had a higher prevalence of females (51.5% vs 35.7%) and CHA2DS2-VASc scores (4.2 ± 1.3 vs 2.0 ± 1.5) compared to the control cohort (n = 1573, both p < 0.01). Even when adjusting for baseline characteristics and antiarrhythmic drug usage, freedom from AA recurrence at 12 months (80.6% vs 78.9%, HRadj:0.97 [95% CI:0.59-1.58], p = 0.90) was comparable between octogenarians and control, respectively. Similar serious adverse event rates were observed between octogenarians (5.0%) and control (3.2%, p = 0.38). The groups did not differ in healthcare utilization nor reduction of AF-related symptoms from baseline to follow-up, but both experienced an improvement in QoL at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite more age-related comorbidities, CBA is a safe and effective treatment for AF in octogenarians, with efficacy and adverse events rates akin to ablations performed in younger patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02752737.

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in elderly patients: an updated meta-analysis of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

Age is a relevant risk factor for the development of atrial fibrillation (AF) and is associated with increased recurrence rates in the setting of rhythm-control. Catheter ablation is increasingly advocated in elderly despite conflicting data regarding its efficacy and safety in this patient cohort. Therefore, we aimed to analyze currently available evidence regarding catheter ablation for AF in patients ≥75 years compared to younger patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search and meta-analysis on efficacy and safety of catheter ablation in patients ≥75 years with AF. Primary efficacy and safety endpoints were: first recurrence of atrial arrhythmia following first-time ablation and occurrence of death, stroke, or any procedure-related complication. Secondary outcomes included procedure and fluoroscopy time.

RESULTS

We identified 301 potentially relevant studies of which 39 underwent detailed analysis. A total of 19 studies (MINORS score ≥13) reporting on 108,419 patients (101,844 <75 years, 6,575 ≥75 years) undergoing first-time catheter ablation for AF were included. Risk of arrhythmia recurrence following catheter ablation (39% vs. 32%; RR [95% CI] 1.24 [1.09-1.41]; P=0.001) and occurrence of safety endpoints (10.8% vs. 8.5%; RR [95% CI] 1.64 [1.53-1.76], P<0.00001) were significantly higher in patients ≥ 75 years compared to younger patients. There was no difference concerning procedure (P=0.33) or fluoroscopy time (P=0.91) between younger and elderly patients.

CONCLUSION

In patients ≥75 years of age catheter ablation for AF has higher risk of arrhythmia recurrence and is associated with an increased risk of procedure-related complications and safety endpoint occurrence compared to younger patients.

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in elderly and very elderly patients: safety, outcomes, and quality of life

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) risk increases with age. We aim to assess the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation in the older population.

METHODS

All patients undergoing AF ablation (2013-2021) at our institution were enrolled in a prospectively maintained registry. The primary endpoint was AF recurrence. Patients were divided into 3 groups: non-elderly (< 65 years), elderly (65-75 years), and very elderly (> 75 years). Patient surveys at baseline and during follow-up were used to calculate quality of life (QoL) metrics: the AF severity score as well as the AF burden.

RESULTS

A total of 7020 patients were included (42% non-elderly, 42% elderly, and 16% very elderly). Periprocedural major complications were low (< 1.5%) and similar in all groups besides pericardial effusion which was more frequent with older age and similar between the elderly and very elderly. At 3 years, AF recurrence for persistent AF (PersAF) was highest in the very elderly group (48%), followed by the elderly group (42%), and was the lowest in the non-elderly group (36%). In paroxysmal AF (PAF), there was no difference in AF recurrence between the elderly and non-elderly, while the very elderly remained associated with a significantly increased risk. Multivariable Cox analysis confirmed these findings (PersAF; elderly: HR = 1.23, P = 0.003; very elderly: HR = 1.44, P < 0.001) (PAF; elderly: HR = 1.04, P = 0.62; very elderly: HR = 1.30, P = 0.01). Catheter ablation resulted in a significant improvement in quality of life, irrespective of age group.

CONCLUSION

Catheter ablation in elderly and very elderly patients is safe, efficacious, and associated with QoL benefits. Overall, major complications were minimal and did not differ significantly between age groups, with the exception of pericardial effusions which were higher in the elderly and very elderly compared to non-elderly adults. Very elderly patients had a higher rate of AF recurrence when compared with elderly or non-elderly patients. Nevertheless, ablation resulted in a remarkable improvement in QoL and a reduction of AF burden and AF symptoms with a similar magnitude, irrespective of age.

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 .

Efficacy and safety of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation (CA) is a well-established therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); however, there is paucity of data for elderly patients. We aimed to assess long-term efficacy and safety of CA for elderly patients with AF.

METHODS

Medline, BVS, Cochrane, and Embase were searched through April 2023 to investigate comparative outcomes between elderly patients > 75 or 80 years, as per-study cutoff, and individuals ≤ 75/80 years, undergoing CA. Primary efficacy and safety endpoints (AF recurrence and procedure-related major complications) were pooled with the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 3.0 software. Subgroup analyses were performed by age groups and type of procedure (radiofrequency vs. cryoballoon).

RESULTS

Four thousand eight hundred twenty-nine titles were screened, and 27 studies were included, being 26 observational and 1 randomized trial, comprising 117,869 patients, being 8714 (7.4%) elderly > 75/80 years, with follow-up from 11.7 to 72.3 months. In comparative studies (N = 17 studies), elderly > 75/80 years had a higher risk of AF recurrence compared to those ≤ 75/80: relative risk (RR) 1.16 (95% CI 1.05-1.27, p = 0.002. However, funnel plot indicated publication bias, and after imputation of 5 studies, the groups were similar (RR 1.07 (95% CI 0.97-1.19)). The rates of major complications (N = 14 studies) were higher in elderly > 75/80 years (RR 1.30 (95% CI 1.10-1.54), I2 = 0, p = 0.002), but were similar in cryoablation studies (N = 7) (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.94-1.29, p = 0.24, I2 = 0.0). Results were similar when individual study arms (N = 27 studies) were pooled.

CONCLUSION

AF ablation is feasible in elderly patients > 75/80 years, with success rates compared to younger individuals. Complication rates, however, were higher.

Cardiovascular events and death after catheter ablation in very old patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is recommended for selected older patients. However, the preventive effects of AF ablation on cardiovascular events and death remain unclear, especially in older patients. This study aimed to investigate the impact of AF ablation on the incidence of cardiovascular events and death in very old nonvalvular AF (NVAF) patients.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of consecutive patients with NVAF aged ≥80 years and using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). We defined cardiovascular events as acute heart failure (AHF), strokes and systemic embolisms (SSEs), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and sudden cardiac death (SCD) and cardiovascular death as AHF/SSE/ACS-related death and SCD. We compared the 3-year incidence of cardiovascular events and death between the patients who underwent AF ablation (Ablation group) and those who received medical therapy only (Medication group).

RESULTS

Among the 782 NVAF patients using DOACs, propensity score matching provided 208 patients in each group. The Ablation group had a significantly lower 3-year incidence of cardiovascular events and death than the Medication group: cardiovascular events, 24 (13.2%) vs. 43 (23.3%), log-rank P = 0.009 and hazard ratio (HR) 0.52 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.86) and cardiovascular deaths, 5 (3.0%) vs. 15 (7.8%), log-rank P = 0.019 and HR 0.32 (95% CI 0.16-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

In very old NVAF patients using DOACs, those who underwent AF ablation had a lower incidence of both cardiovascular events and death than those who received medical therapy only.

Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation in the Elderly >75 Years Old: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Background: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an established therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); however, there is a limited understanding of LAAC in elderly patients (≥75 years old). We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the procedural complications and long-term outcomes after LAAC in the elderly versus the non-elderly. Methods: We screened PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Procedural endpoints of interest included successful implantation LAAC rates, in-hospital mortality, major bleeding events, pericardial effusion/tamponade, stroke, and vascular access complications related to LAAC. Long-term outcomes included all-cause mortality, major bleeding events, and stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) during follow-up. Results: Finally, 12 studies were included in the analysis; these included a total of 25,094 people in the elderly group and 36,035 people in the non-elderly group. The successful implantation LAAC rates did not differ between the groups, while the elderly patients experienced more periprocedural mortality (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.79−3.83, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), pericardial effusion/tamponade (OR 1.39; 95% CI: 1.06−1.82, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), major bleeding events (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.17−1.48, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), and vascular access complications (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.16−1.55, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%) than the non-elderly patients. The long-term stroke/TIA rates did not differ between the elderly and the non-elderly at least one year after follow-up. Conclusions: Even though successful implantation LAAC rates are similar, elderly patients have a significantly higher incidence of periprocedural mortality, major bleeding events, vascular access complications, and pericardial effusion/tamponade after LAAC than non-elderly patients. The stroke/TIA rates did not differ between both groups after at least one-year follow-up.

Early Rhythm Control in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and High Comorbidity Burden

BACKGROUND

The randomized EAST-AFNET4 (Early Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention Trial-Atrial Fibrillation Network) demonstrated that early rhythm control (ERC) reduces adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with recently diagnosed atrial fibrillation and stroke risk factors. The effectiveness and safety of ERC in patients with multiple cardiovascular comorbidities is not known.

METHODS

These prespecified subanalyses of EAST-AFNET4 compared the effectiveness and safety of ERC with usual care (UC) stratified into patients with higher (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4) and lower comorbidity burden. Sensitivity analyses ignored sex (CHA2DS2-VA score).

RESULTS

EAST-AFNET4 randomized 1093 patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4 (74.8±6.8 years, 61% female) and 1696 with CHA2DS2-VASc score <4 (67.4±8.0 years, 37% female). ERC reduced the composite primary efficacy outcome of cardiovascular death, stroke, or hospitalization for worsening of heart failure or for acute coronary syndrome in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4 (ERC, 127/549 patients with events; UC, 183/544 patients with events; hazard ratio [HR], 0.64 [0.51-0.81]; P < 0.001) but not in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score <4 (ERC, 122/846 patients with events; UC, 133/850 patients with events; HR, 0.93 [0.73-1.19]; P=0.56, Pinteraction=0.037). The primary safety outcome (death, stroke, or serious adverse events of rhythm control therapy) was not different between study groups in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4 (ERC, 112/549 patients with events; UC, 132/544 patients with events; HR, 0.84 [0.65, 1.08]; P=0.175), but occurred more often in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc scores <4 randomized to ERC (ERC, 119/846 patients with events; UC, 91/850 patients with events; HR, 1.39 [1.05-1.82]; P=0.019, Pinteraction=0.008). Life-threatening events or death were not different between groups (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4, ERC, 84/549 patients with event, UC, 96/544 patients with event; CHA2DS2-VASc scores <4, ERC, 75/846 patients with event, UC, 73/850 patients with event). When female sex was ignored for the creation of higher and lower risk groups (CHA2DS2-VA score), the Pinteraction was not significant for the primary efficacy outcome (P=0.25), but remained significant (P=0.044) for the primary safety outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with recently diagnosed atrial fibrillation and CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4 should be considered for ERC to reduce cardiovascular outcomes, whereas those with fewer comorbidities may have less favorable outcomes with ERC.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT01288352. URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu; Unique identifier: 2010-021258-20. URL: https://www.isrctn.com/; Unique identifier: ISRCTN04708680.

Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in the Elderly > 75 Years old: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is increasingly performed worldwide. As comfort with AF ablation increases, the procedure is increasingly used in patients that are older and in those with more comorbidities. However, it is not well established whether AF ablation in the elderly, especially those >75 years old, has comparable safety and efficacy to younger populations.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety profiles in patients older than 75years undergoing AF ablation with younger patients.

METHODS

Databases from EMBASE, Medline, PubMed and Cochrane, were searched from inception through September 2021. Studies that compared the success rates in AF catheter ablation and all complications rates between patients who were older vs under 75 years were included. Effect estimates from the individual studies were extracted and combined using random effect, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven observational studies were included in the analysis consisting of 363,542 patients who underwent AF ablation. Comparing patients older than 75 years old to younger patients, there was no difference in the success of ablation rates between elderly and younger patients (pooled OR 0.85: 95% CI:0.69 - 1.05, p=0.131). On the other hand, AF ablation in the elderly was associated with higher complication rates (pooled OR 1.43: 95% CI:1.21 - 1.68, p<0.001) CONCLUSION: As AF ablation is expanded to elderly populations, our study found that AF ablation success rates were similar in both elderly and younger patients. However, older patients experience higher rates of complications that should be considered when offering the procedure and as a means to improve outcomes with future innovations. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.