Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction

Recurrence of left ventricular systolic dysfunction and its risk factors in heart failure with improved ejection fraction patients receiving guideline-directed medical therapy: A trajectory analysis based on echocardiography

BACKGROUND

Despite the better prognosis of heart failure (HF) with improved ejection fraction (HFimpEF), remnant cardiovascular risks, including cardiovascular death, rehospitalization, and future deterioration of left ventricular (LV) systolic function, remain in HFimpEF. However, for HFimpEF patients, especially for those receiving guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), the recurrent LV systolic dysfunction and its risk factors is still unclear.

METHODS

A total of 1098 HF patients under HF follow-up management system were initially screened. Echocardiography was re-evaluated at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. After exclusion, a total of 203 HFimpEF patients on GDMT were enrolled in our final analysis. Cox regression analysis was conducted to select risk factors.

RESULTS

During the 1-year follow-up, a total of 28 (13.8%) patients had recurrent LV systolic dysfunction. The trajectory analysis of echocardiographic parameters illustrated that persistent decline of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and worsening LV remodeling was observed in patients with recurrent LV systolic dysfunction. Multivariable Cox regression analysis identified that ischemic cardiomyopathy, atrial fibrillation, higher left ventricular end-diastolic diameter index (LVEDDI), elevated serum potassium, and a lack of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) treatment were confirmed as independent risk factors for recurrent LV systolic dysfunction. Recurrent LV systolic dysfunction was associated with higher rehospitalization rate.

CONCLUSION

In our longitudinal cohort study, almost 14% HFimpEF receiving GDMT suffered recurrent LV systolic dysfunction. Ischemic cardiomyopathy, atrial fibrillation, higher LVEDDI, higher serum potassium, and a lack of SGLT2i therapy were tightly associated with recurrence of LV systolic dysfunction. Relapse of LV systolic dysfunction correlated with poor prognosis.

Development and validation of a predictive model for atrial fibrillation recurrence post-catheter ablation in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation on the basis of hemodynamic parameters

BACKGROUND

The influence of hemodynamic parameters on the recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation is not well known, and it remains unclear whether a nomogram combining risk factors and hemodynamic parameters improves prediction accuracy.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to develop a nomogram on the basis of echocardiographic hemodynamic parameters for predicting AF recurrence after catheter ablation in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).

METHODS

A total of 380 consecutive patients with NVAF undergoing AF catheter ablation treatment were prospectively included. Patients were divided into training and validation cohorts in a 7:3 ratio. The follow-up time averaged 9 months with a median of 12 months, during which 132 patients (34.7%) experienced AF recurrence.

RESULTS

Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression and Cox regression analyses identified 4 significant predictors of AF recurrence: persistent AF (hazard ratio [HR] 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.61; P = .041), S/D ratio of pulmonary vein (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.30-0.84; P = .009), left atrial acceleration factor α (HR 1.31; 95% CI 1.02-1.68; P = .032), and left atrial appendage peak emptying flow velocity (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.97-0.99; P = .004). On the basis of these 4 variables, a predictive nomogram was constructed. The nomogram demonstrated C indices of 0.664 and 0.728 for predicting 1- and 2-year AF recurrence, respectively, in the validation cohort. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis indicated that a Nomo score of >128 was associated with a higher risk of AF recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Hemodynamic parameters may offer valuable insight into predicting AF recurrence after catheter ablation. Our study successfully developed a reliable nomogram on the basis of echocardiographic hemodynamic parameters to estimate the risk of AF recurrence after catheter ablation in patients with NVAF.

Catheter ablation for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. A review

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common cardiac arrhythmia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The higher mortality is due to the risk of heart failure and cardioembolic events. This in-depth review focuses on the strategies and efficacy of catheter ablation for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. The main medical databases were searched for contemporary studies on catheter ablation for non-paroxysmal AF. Catheter ablation is currently proven to be the most effective treatment for AF and consists of pulmonary vein isolation as the cornerstone plus additional ablations. In terms of SR maintenance, it is less effective in non-paroxysmal AF than in paroxysmal patients. but the clinical benefit in non-paroxysmal patients is substantially higher. Since pulmonary vein isolation is ineffective, a variety of techniques have been developed, e.g. linear ablations, ablation of complex atrial fractionated electrograms, etc. Another paradox consists in the technique of catheter ablation. Despite promising results in early observation studies, further randomized studies have not confirmed the initial enthusiasm. Recently, a new approach, pulsed-field ablation, appears promising. This is an in-depth summary of current technologies and techniques for the ablation of non-paroxysmal AF. We discuss the benefits, risks and implications in the treatment of patients with non-paroxysmal AF.

Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients: Where do we stand in 2023? - State of the art review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure are common overlapping cardiovascular disorders. Despite important therapeutic advances over the past several decades, controversy persists about whether a rate control or rhythm control approach constitutes the best option in this population. There is also considerable debate about whether antiarrhythmic drug therapy or ablation is the best approach when rhythm control is pursued.  A brief historical examination of the literature addressing this issue will be performed. An analysis of several important clinical outcomes observed in the prospective, randomized studies, which have compared AF ablation to non-ablation treatment options, will be discussed. This review will conclude with recommendations to guide clinicians on the status of AF ablation as a treatment option when considering management options in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation.

Effectiveness of Catheter Ablation in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction, Stroke, Quality of Life, All-Cause Mortality, Sinus Rhythm Maintenance, and Hospitalization Rates as Compared to Medical Therapy

Atrial fibrillation (AF) in the setting of heart failure (HF) accounts for a significant proportion of mortality. AF can be managed either with rate control or rhythm control strategies. Rate control involves the use of beta blockers or calcium channel blockers. Rhythm control methods use antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation (CA) to abolish the rhythm. Articles from PubMed and Google Scholar were chosen for review. The literature was reviewed for data from the last 10 years to be chosen for interpretation. Clinical trials, meta-analyses, and systematic analysis were included in this study. Various health parameters such as all-cause mortality, hospitalization rates, sinus rhythm (SR) maintenance, quality of life improvement, stroke risk, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement, and healthcare costs were analyzed. We demonstrated that CA was superior to medical therapy in reducing all-cause mortality and hospitalization. It leads to significant improvement in LVEF as SR was maintained consistently. Overall, quality of life improved in those who underwent ablation as compared to those who did not. Stroke risk reduction was seen in observational studies only. We recommend CA as first-line therapy for treating patients with AF in the setting of HF. More clinical trials are needed to determine the effectiveness of ablation in reducing stroke risk.

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation: a Sub-Saharan African perspective

Cardiovascular diseases are a well-established cause of death in high-income countries. In the last 20 years, Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has seen one of the sharpest increases in cardiovascular disease-related mortality, superseding that of infectious diseases, including HIV/AIDS, in South Africa. This increase is evidenced by a growing burden of heart failure and atrial fibrillation (AF) risk factors. AF is a common comorbidity of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), which predisposes to an increased risk of stroke, rehospitalizations, and mortality compared with patients in sinus rhythm. AF had the largest relative increase in cardiovascular disease burden between 1990 and 2010 in SSA and the second highest (106.4%) increase in disability-adjusted life-years (DALY) between 1990 and 2017. Over the last decade, significant advancements in the management of both HFrEF and AF have emerged. However, managing HFrEF/AF remains a clinical challenge for physicians, compounded by the suboptimal efficacy of guideline-mandated pharmacotherapy in this group of patients. There may be an essential role for racial differences and genetic influence on therapeutic outcomes of HFrEF/AF patients, further complicating our overall understanding of the disease and its pathophysiology. In SSA, the lack of accurate and up-to-date epidemiological data on this subgroup of patients presents a challenge in our quest to prevent and reduce adverse outcomes. This narrative review provides a contemporary overview of the epidemiology of HFrEF/AF in SSA. We highlight important differences in the demographic and aetiological profile and the management of this subpopulation, emphasizing what is currently known and, more importantly, what is still unknown about HFrEF/AF in SSA.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of cardiac implantable electronic devices with reactive atrial-based antitachycardia pacing

AIMS

Reactive atrial-based anti-tachycardia pacing (rATP) in pacemakers (PMs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds) has been reported to prevent progression of atrial fibrillation, and this reduced progression is expected to decrease the risk of complications such as stroke and heart failure (HF). This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of rATP in PMs and CRT-Ds in the Japanese public health insurance system.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We developed a Markov model comprising five states: bradycardia, post-stroke, mild HF, severe HF, and death. For devices with rATP and control devices without rATP, we compared the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the payer's perspective. Costs were estimated from healthcare resource utilisation data in a Japanese claims database. We evaluated model uncertainty by analysing two scenarios for each device. The ICER was 763 729 JPY/QALY (5616 EUR/QALY) for PMs and 1,393 280 JPY/QALY (10 245 EUR/QALY) for CRT-Ds. In all scenarios, ICERs were below 5 million JPY/QALY (36 765 EUR/QALY), supporting robustness of the results.

CONCLUSION

According to a willingness to pay threshold of 5 million JPY/QALY, the devices with rATP were cost-effective compared with control devices without rATP, showing that the higher reimbursement price of the functional categories with rATP is justified from a healthcare economic perspective.

Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Structural Heart Disease: A Review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. Patients with structural heart disease (SHD) are at an increased risk of developing this arrhythmia and are particularly susceptible to the deleterious hemodynamic effects it carries. In the last two decades, catheter ablation (CA) has emerged as a valuable strategy for rhythm control and is currently part of the standard care for symptomatic relief in patients with AF. Growing evidence suggests that CA of AF may have potential benefits that extend beyond symptoms. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge of this intervention on SHD patients.

Atrial fibrillation ablation as first-line therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF): evaluating the impact on patient survival

INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure share several pathophysiological mechanisms. As a result of their association, patients have worse outcomes than if either condition were present alone.

AREAS COVERED

While multiple trials report no significant difference between the use of pharmacological rhythm control and the use of rate control in terms of mortality and morbidity in patients with HFrEF, there is evidence to suggest that catheter ablation is beneficial in this patient population. The present review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of catheter ablation as a treatment modality for atrial fibrillation in patients with HFrEF as well as evaluate its outcome on survival.

EXPERT OPINION

An appropriate patient selection strategy for patients with HFrEF could be the next step in determining which patients might benefit most from catheter ablation. Future atrial fibrillation management may incorporate digital health and pulsed-field ablation.

Safety, Efficacy and Prognostic Benefit of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Up to 65% of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) develop AF during the course of the disease. This occurrence is associated with adverse outcomes, including pump failure death. Because AF and HFpEF are mutually reinforcing risk factors, sinus rhythm restoration may represent a disease-modifying intervention. While catheter ablation exhibits acceptable safety and efficacy profiles, no randomised trials have compared AF ablation with medical management in HFpEF. However, catheter ablation has been reported to result in lower natriuretic peptides, lower filling pressures, greater peak cardiac output and improved functional capacity in HFpEF. There is growing evidence that catheter ablation may reduce HFpEF severity, hospitalisation and mortality compared to medical management. Based on indirect evidence, early catheter ablation and minimally extensive atrial injury should be favoured. Hence, individualised ablation strategies stratified by stepwise substrate inducibility provide a logical basis for catheter-based rhythm control in this heterogenous population. Randomised trials are needed for definitive evidence-based guidelines.

Herzinsuffizienz und Vorhofflimmern – eine Zwillingsepidemie

Vorhofflimmern (VHF) und eine Herzinsuffizienz begünstigen sich gegenseitig und treten häufig in Kombination auf. Eine effektive Therapie des VHF inklusive der möglicherweise notwendigen Antikoagulation sollte zentraler Baustein bei Patienten mit eingeschränkter systolischer Funktion und VHF sein. Medikamentöse Therapieoptionen sind in der Regel wenig effektiv, sodass zunehmend Katheterablationsverfahren zur Behandlung dieser Patienten in den Vordergrund gestellt werden. Randomisierte Studien bei selektierten Patienten zeigen nicht nur einen symptomatischen Effekt auf die Herzinsuffizienz, sondern neben Verbesserung der LV-Funktion auch einen Letalitätsbenefit der effektiven Ablation von VHF. In der Zukunft gilt es, Patienten sinnvoll für die Katheterablation zu identifizieren. Ob das reine Vorhandensein von VHF oder eher die VHF-Last bei Patienten mit Herzinsuffizienz entscheidend für die Prognose ist, wird aktuell in weiteren Studien untersucht.

Machine Learning Using a Single-Lead ECG to Identify Patients With Atrial Fibrillation-Induced Heart Failure

Aims

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure often co-exist. Early identification of AF patients at risk for AF-induced heart failure (AF-HF) is desirable to reduce both morbidity and mortality as well as health care costs. We aimed to leverage the characteristics of beat-to-beat-patterns in AF to prospectively discriminate AF patients with and without AF-HF.

Methods

A dataset of 10,234 5-min length RR-interval time series derived from 26 AF-HF patients and 26 control patients was extracted from single-lead Holter-ECGs. A total of 14 features were extracted, and the most informative features were selected. Then, a decision tree classifier with 5-fold cross-validation was trained, validated, and tested on the dataset randomly split. The derived algorithm was then tested on 2,261 5-min segments from six AF-HF and six control patients and validated for various time segments.

Results

The algorithm based on the spectral entropy of the RR-intervals, the mean value of the relative RR-interval, and the root mean square of successive differences of the relative RR-interval yielded an accuracy of 73.5%, specificity of 91.4%, sensitivity of 64.7%, and PPV of 87.0% to correctly stratify segments to AF-HF. Considering the majority vote of the segments of each patient, 10/12 patients (83.33%) were correctly classified.

Conclusion

Beat-to-beat-analysis using a machine learning classifier identifies patients with AF-induced heart failure with clinically relevant diagnostic properties. Application of this algorithm in routine care may improve early identification of patients at risk for AF-induced cardiomyopathy and improve the yield of targeted clinical follow-up.

Atrial fibrillation in heart failure: Prime time for ablation!

Among heart failure (HF) patients, the onset of atrial fibrillation (AF) is often associated with a marked worsening of HF symptoms and increased morbidity and mortality. Among AF patients, 30%–40% experience at least 1 HF episode. New data suggest that, in HF patients, AF rhythm control is superior to rate control and that rhythm control by catheter ablation is superior to antiarrhythmic drugs. In recent years, several trials that addressed the impact of AF ablation on morbidity and mortality included HF patients; however, studies also have specifically investigated the growing cohort of patients suffering from both HF and AF. Although the majority of these trials showed a marked benefit of AF ablation, there are hints that not all HF patients benefit equally from AF ablation. AF treatment in HF is challenging because the same cardiac morbidities that lead to HF can also act as risk factors for the development of the arrhythmogenic substrate that causes AF. In many patients, this arrhythmogenic substrate can be successfully treated by antral pulmonary vein isolation pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). However, due to advanced atrial disease, some patients also might require multiple procedures and/or “PVI plus” ablation strategies. In this review, we summarize current data on the effect of AF ablation in HF patients, with a special focus on the beneficial effect of AF ablation in different clinical HF subgroups.

The role of atrial fibrillation catheter ablation in patients with heart failure

Atrial Fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) frequently coexist, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Therapeutic options for patients with AF and HFrEF are limited due to few antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) choices and historically equivocal effects of procedural interventions on mortality. However, recent randomized trials examining catheter ablation (CA) in AF patients with HFrEF have shown a beneficial effect on arrhythmic burden and HF symptoms, as well as an improvement in mortality. This review focuses on the role of CA for AF patients with HFrEF.

Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure: What do we know? What can we do?

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are two conditions that frequently impact reciprocally on each other. Patients with HFrEF have an increased risk of stroke, hospitalization and mortality after they develop AF and vice versa, AF causing deterioration of the ejection fraction is also associated to increased mortality. Catheter ablation has emerged as an effective alternative to antiarrhythmic drug treatment to maintain sinus rhythm and some randomized trials have shown a potential benefit in terms of mortality and hospitalization. This review discusses the available evidence regarding catheter ablation treatment in this specific patient group.

Managing Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Atrial fibrillation and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction are increasing in prevalence worldwide. Atrial fibrillation can precipitate and can be a consequence of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and cardiomyopathy. Atrial fibrillation and heart failure, when present together, are associated with worse outcomes. Together, these 2 conditions increase the risk of stroke, requiring oral anticoagulation in many or left atrial appendage closure in some. Medical management for rate and rhythm control of atrial fibrillation in heart failure remain hampered by variable success, intolerance, and adverse effects. In multiple randomized clinical trials in recent years, catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction has shown superiority in improving survival, quality of life, and ventricular function and reducing heart failure hospitalizations compared with antiarrhythmic drugs and rate control therapies. This has resulted in a paradigm shift in management toward nonpharmacological rhythm control of atrial fibrillation in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The primary objective of this American Heart Association scientific statement is to review the available evidence on the epidemiology and pathophysiology of atrial fibrillation in relation to heart failure and to provide guidance on the latest advances in pharmacological and nonpharmacological management of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. The writing committee's consensus on the implications for clinical practice, gaps in knowledge, and directions for future research are highlighted.

The Care of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) are the 2 emerging epidemics in global cardiovascular disease. AF remains the most common cardiac arrhythmia, affecting over 33 million adults worldwide, and continues to increase in prevalence as the populations of many nations age. The prevalence of HF also surges, now afflicting 37 million adults globally. Interestingly, these 2 disease processes share many of the same risk factors and stem from many of the same pathophysiologic derangements, with AF occurring in over half of all patients with HF and HF occurring in over one third of all patients with AF. Furthermore, exacerbation of one of these ailments often drives decompensation or compromises therapy of the other, and it has been widely reported that coexistence of AF in patients with HF portends a poorer prognosis. As a result, many clinicians now routinely face the problem of AF in the patient with HF. In this review, we highlight the fundamental pathologic forces embedded in the relationship between AF and HF and then proceed to a discussion on the management of these complex patients with a detailed exploration of the clinical data.

New lesion after endovascular therapy of femoropopliteal lesions for intermittent claudication

BACKGROUND

Although the incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR) was decreased in patients who underwent endovascular therapy (EVT) for femoropopliteal (FP) lesions, the clinical impact of newly developed lesions could not be disqualified in those patients.

METHODS

Between January 2012 and December 2018, 911 patients with intermittent claudication (IC) who have not been previously treated for this condition underwent a successful EVT for de novo FP lesions in a multicenter registry (WATERMELON registry: neW lesion AfTer EndovasculaR therapy for interMittEnt cLaudicatiON).

RESULTS

The mean follow-up duration was 3.5 ± 1.9 years. At 5 years, 53% patients underwent limb revascularization, (new lesion: 42% and TLR: 31%). We developed an ordinal risk score to predict the possibility of new lesion revascularization the following risk factors: body mass index (<23 kg/m² , 1 point), diabetes (2 points), hemodialysis (3 points), and atrial fibrillation (2 points). The patients were divided into three groups: low risk group (0-1 points: N = 283), intermediate risk group (2-3 points: N = 395), and high risk group (≥4 points: N = 233). The cumulative 5-year incidence of new lesion revascularization was 28% in the low risk group, 40% in the intermediate group, and 68% in the high risk group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

within 5 years after the first EVT, more than half of the patients underwent limb revascularization. Of these patients, 42% underwent new lesion revascularization. Patients with a body mass index <23 kg/m² , diabetes, hemodialysis, and atrial fibrillation had increased risk for new lesion revascularization.

Drastic Cardiac Reverse Remodeling Following Catheter Ablation in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure

In the management of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure, rate control is recommended, whereas the implication of rhythm control remains controversial. We experienced a 65-year-old man who had compensated heart failure due to hypertensive heart disease and atrial fibrillation with well-controlled heart rate (<100 bpm). At three months following the catheter ablation procedure, the left ventricular ejection fraction improved from 40% up to 65%. The implication of rhythm control using catheter ablation in improving cardiac reverse remodeling should be validated in large-scale clinical studies.

Left Atrial Myopathy in Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure: Clinical Implications, Mechanisms, and Therapeutic Targets

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review discusses the mechanisms, clinical implications, and treatments of left atrial (LA) myopathy in comorbid atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) across the spectrum of ejection fraction.

RECENT FINDINGS

AF and HF are highly comorbid conditions. Left atrial (LA) myopathy, characterized by impairments in LA structure, function, or electrical conduction, plays a fundamental role in the development of both AF and HF with preserved ejection fraction (AF-HFpEF) along with AF and HF with reduced ejection fraction (AF-HFrEF). While the nature of LA myopathy in AF-HFpEF is unique from that of AF-HFrEF, LA myopathy also leads to progression of both of these conditions. There may be a vulnerable cohort of AF-HF patients who have a disproportionate degree of LA myopathy compared with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. Further investigations are required to identify therapies to improve LA function in this cohort.

Clinical outcomes following rhythm control for atrial fibrillation: is early better?

Introduction: An integral aspect of atrial fibrillation (AF) management involves better symptom control, incorporating a rate control, rhythm control, or a combination strategy. The 2020 ESC Guidelines suggest that rhythm control strategy should be recommended for symptomatic patients, to mitigate their symptoms and improve the quality of life. However, adequately powered randomized control trials and prospective 'real-world' registries are needed to fully assess the impact of early rhythm control strategies on clinical outcomes in patients with AF.Objective: In this narrative review, we discuss clinical outcomes following rhythm management approach among patients with AF, considering the effectiveness of an early intervention strategy.Expert opinion: Patients involvement and shared decision-making are crucial when deciding the optimal management strategy among patients with AF. For those with newly diagnosed symptomatic AF, an early invasive approach such as catheter ablation may have a role in preventing AF progression and subsequent pathophysiological changes.

Usefulness of Post-Procedural Plasma Brain Natriuretic Peptide Levels to Predict Recurrence After Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction

Catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) improves cardiac function, resulting in a decrease in plasma brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). This study sought to examine the pre-procedural and post-procedural correlations between BNP levels and cardiac function and the associations between the BNP levels and recurrence after CA in patients with AF and reduced LVEF. Of 3142 consecutive patients who underwent first-time CA of AF at our institute, a total of 217 patients with LVEF <50% were enrolled. Significant decrease in BNP levels (from a median of 198 [interquartile range 113 to 355] to 47.7 [22.7 to 135] pg/ml, p <0.001) and improvement in LVEF (from 39±9% to 61±16%, p <0.001) were observed 3 months after CA. There was a linear correlation between log-transformed BNP levels and cardiac measures (LVEF: r = -0.64; LV end-diastolic volume: r = 0.25; LV end-systolic volume: r = 0.43; left atrial volume: r = 0.52; all p <0.001). During a median follow-up of 35 months, AF recurrence after a 3-month blanking period was observed in 80 patients (37%). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis after adjustment for cardiac measures significant in univariate analysis revealed that early recurrence within the blanking period (hazard ratio, 4.88; 95% confidence interval, 2.89 to 8.25) and elevated post-procedural BNP levels (2.02 per unit log increase; 1.14 to 3.56) were significant predictors of AF recurrence, but pre-procedural BNP was not. In conclusion, post-procedural BNP levels at the end of the blanking period predicted subsequent AF recurrence in patients with reduced LVEF, independent of early recurrence.

Prevention of non-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: points to remember

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an important and effective therapy for end-stage heart failure. Non-response to CRT is one of the main obstacles to its application in clinical practice. There is no uniform consensus or definition of CRT “response.” Clinical symptoms, ventricular remodeling indices, and cardiovascular events have been reported to be associated with non-responders. To prevent non-response to CRT, three aspects should be thoroughly considered: preoperative patient selection, electrode implantation, and postoperative management. Preoperative selection of appropriate patients for CRT treatment is an important step in preventing non-response. Currently, the CRT inclusion criteria are mainly based on the morphology of QRS waves in deciding ventricular dyssynchrony. Echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance are being explored to predict nonresponse to CRT. The location of left ventricular electrode implantation is a current hot spot of research; it is important to identify the location of the latest exciting ventricular segment and avoid scars. Cardiac magnetic resonance and ultrasonic spot tracking are being progressively developed in this field. Some new techniques such as His Bundle pacing, endocardial electrodes, and novel sensors are also being investigated. Postoperative management of patients is another essential step towards preventing non-response; it mainly focuses on the treatment of the disease itself and CRT program control optimization. CRT treatment is just one part of the overall treatment of heart failure, and multidisciplinary efforts are needed to improve the overall outcome.

Predictors of recurrent atrial fibrillation following catheter ablation

INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a complex and multi-factorial rhythm disorder. Catheter ablation is widely used for the management of AF. However, it is limited by relapse of the arrhythmia necessitating repeat procedures.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to discuss the predictors of post-ablation recurrent AF including age, gender, genetic predisposition, AF type and duration, comorbidities, lifestyle factors, echocardiographic parameters of heart chambers, left atrial fibrosis and ablation strategies and targets. An extensive literature search was undertaken on PubMed and Google Scholar to obtain full texts of relevant AF-related articles.

EXPERT OPINION

Maintenance of stable sinus rhythm is the main intended outcome of AF ablation. Therefore, it is very crucial to identify the risk factors that may influence the ablation success. Most of these predictors such as comorbidities, ablation strategy and targets and lifestyle factors are either reversible or modifiable. Thus, not only the awareness of these known risk factors by both patients and their physicians but also future research to identify the unknown predictors are critical to optimize care in this multi-faceted morbidity.

Long-term outcomes of index cryoballoon ablation or point-by-point radiofrequency ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation and systolic heart failure

Catheter ablation is an established effective approach for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure, however, the role of cryoablation in this setting is unclear. Procedural success and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVEF) improvement in patients with LVEF ≤ 45% undergoing index catheter ablation with cryoablation were evaluated. Freedom from AF recurrence was seen in 43% rising to 59% following repeat procedure. There were significant improvements in LVEF and functional status at long-term follow-up. Results were comparable to a contemporaneous cohort of heart failure patients undergoing index ablation with radiofrequency ablation. Cryoablation is an effective first-line AF ablation approach in the setting of heart failure.

Catheter Ablation Compared with Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation with Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: The optimal strategy for patients with coexisting atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) was not settled. Our purpose was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the effect of catheter ablation compared with medical therapy for AF on mortality, HF hospitalization, left ventricular (LV) function, and quality of life among patients with HF and AF. Materials and Methods: We searched Pubmed (1966 to September 20, 2019), EMBASE (1966 to September 20, 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials with a comparison of catheter ablation for AF with medical therapy among patients with coexisting AF and HF. Risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used as a measure of the effect of catheter ablation versus medical therapy on endpoints. Our final analysis included 6 randomized control trials with 775 patients. Results: Pooled results from the random-effects model showed that compared with medical therapy for AF, catheter ablation was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (RR 0.52, 95%Cl, 0.35 to 0.76) and HF hospitalization (RR 0.56, 95%Cl, 0.44 to 0.71), as well as increased LV ejection fraction (LVEF), distance walked in six minutes, and improvements in quality of life. Conclusions: This updated meta-analysis showed that compared to medical therapy, catheter ablation for AF was associated with significant benefits in several key clinical and biomarker endpoints, including reductions in all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization.

The 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Heart Rhythm Society Comprehensive Guidelines for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) atrial fibrillation (AF) guidelines program was developed to aid clinicians in the management of these complex patients, as well as to provide direction to policy makers and health care systems regarding related issues. The most recent comprehensive CCS AF guidelines update was published in 2010. Since then, periodic updates were published dealing with rapidly changing areas. However, since 2010 a large number of developments had accumulated in a wide range of areas, motivating the committee to complete a thorough guideline review. The 2020 iteration of the CCS AF guidelines represents a comprehensive renewal that integrates, updates, and replaces the past decade of guidelines, recommendations, and practical tips. It is intended to be used by practicing clinicians across all disciplines who care for patients with AF. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system was used to evaluate recommendation strength and the quality of evidence. Areas of focus include: AF classification and definitions, epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical evaluation, screening and opportunistic AF detection, detection and management of modifiable risk factors, integrated approach to AF management, stroke prevention, arrhythmia management, sex differences, and AF in special populations. Extensive use is made of tables and figures to synthesize important material and present key concepts. This document should be an important aid for knowledge translation and a tool to help improve clinical management of this important and challenging arrhythmia.

[The effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation and repeated cardioversion in combination with antiarrhythmic drug therapy in maintaining stable sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure]

Aim To compare the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and antiarrhythmic therapy (AAT) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic heart failure (CHF) during 12-month observation.Materials and methods This prospective, nonrandomized comparative observational study included 130 patients with AF (men, 65 %; mean age, 62.8±11.8 years) and CHF with left ventricular ejection fraction (LV EF) &lt;50 %. Paroxysmal AF was observed in 60 (46 %) patients and persistent AF was observed in 70 (54 %) patients. According to results of transthoracic echocardiography (EchoCG) 107 (82 %) patients had intermediate LV EF (40-49 %) and 23 (18 %) patients had reduced LV EF (&lt;40 %). RFA of AF was performed for 65 patients whereas 65 patients received an optimal AAT. The 24-h electrocardiogram monitoring, EchoCG, and assessment of the quality of life (QoL) with the SF-36 questionnaire were performed for all patients on admission and at 12 months of observation. Stability of sinus rhythm, EchoCG, QoL, and exercise tolerance were evaluated at 12 months of observation.Results 49 (75%) of patients in the RFA group and 26 (40%) of patients in the AAT group had stable sinus rhythm (SR) at 12 months. Repeated RFA for relapse of AF was performed for 6 (12 %) of 49 patients; repeated cardioversion was performed for 16 (61.5 %) of 26 patients. In the AAT group, there were more interventions for maintaining SR than in the RFA group (p&lt;0.001). In patients with SR of the RFA group at 12 months of observation, LV EF was increased (р&lt;0.001), left ventricular dimension (р&lt;0.001) and volume (р&lt;0.001) were decreased, and mental (р&lt;0.001) and physical (p&lt;0.001) components of health were improved according to the SF-36 questionnaire. In patients with SR of the AAT group, only improvement of mental (р&lt;0.001) and physical (р&lt;0.001) components of health was observed according to the SF-36 questionnaire.Conclusion RFA provided a considerable decrease in the frequency of AF relapse and improvement of LV EF in patients with CHF. The effectiveness of RFA did not depend on the type of arrhythmia. For 12 months of observation, the number of hospitalizations for decompensated CHF and interventions to maintain SR decreased in the RFA group compared to the AAT group.

Impact of the Temporal Relationship Between Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure on Prognosis After Ablation

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to elucidate the effect of the temporal relationship between atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) on clinical outcomes after catheter ablation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We included 129 consecutive patients with AF and HF who underwent catheter ablation in hospital from December 2014 to September 2017. The patients were divided into 2 groups based on the temporal relationship between AF and HF. Group 1 consisted of 42 patients with AF following HF while Group 2 consisted of 87 patients with AF preceding HF or those who developed both of them simultaneously at the timing of first visit to a doctor. The primary endpoint was a composite of death and hospitalization due to HF during a 2-year follow-up. AF recurrence was more common in Group 1 (45% vs. 23%; hazard ratio [HR], 2.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-4.94; P=0.009). Death and HF hospitalization were more frequent in Group 1 (19 [45%], 6 [7%] patients, respectively, P<0.0001). After adjustment for several covariates, patients in Group 1 were independently associated with poorer outcomes after AF ablation (HR, 8.66; 95% CI, 2.942-5.5; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Adverse clinical outcomes of death, HF hospitalization and AF recurrence were more frequent in patients with AF following HF than in those with AF preceding HF.

Association Between Atrial Fibrillation and Sudden Cardiac Death

Emerging evidence suggests that atrial fibrillation (AF) may be associated with an increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, AF shares risk factors with numerous cardiac conditions, including coronary heart disease and heart failure—the 2 most common substrates for SCD—making the AF-SCD relationship particularly challenging to address. A careful consideration of confounding factors is essential, since interventions for AF will be effective in reducing SCD only if there is a causal association between these 2 conditions. In this translational review, we detail the plausible underlying pathophysiological mechanisms through which AF may promote or lead to SCD, as well as the existing epidemiological evidence supporting an association between AF and SCD. While the role of AF in predicting SCD in the general population appears limited and not established, AF might be integrated to improve risk stratification in some specific phenotypes. Optimal AF management, including that of its associated conditions, appears to be of interest to prevent AF-related SCD, especially because the AF-SCD relationship is in part driven by heart failure.

Generalizability of the CASTLE-AF trial: Catheter ablation for patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure in routine practice

BACKGROUND

In the Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation with Heart Failure (CASTLE-AF) trial, catheter ablation reduced the risk of death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with atrial fibrillation and HF by 40%.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to assess the generalizability of CASTLE-AF to routine clinical practice.

METHODS

Using a large US administrative database, we identified 289,831 patients with atrial fibrillation and HF treated with ablation (n = 7465) or medical therapy alone (n = 282,366) from January 1, 2008, through August 31, 2018. Patients were divided into 3 groups on the basis of trial eligibility: (1) eligible for CASTLE-AF, (2) failing to meet the inclusion criteria, and (3) meeting at least 1 of the exclusion criteria. Propensity score overlap weighting was used to balance ablated and drug-treated patients on 90 baseline characteristics. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare ablation with medical therapy for the primary outcome of a composite end point of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization.

RESULTS

Only 7.8% of patients would have been eligible for the trial; 91.0% failed to meet the trial inclusion criteria; and 15.5% met the exclusion criteria. Ablation was associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome in the overall cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.87; P < .001), in the trial-eligible cohort (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70-0.96; P = .01), and in patients who failed to meet inclusion criteria (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73-0.86; P < .001) but not in patients who met the exclusion criteria (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.81-1.17). The relative risk reduction was consistent regardless of whether patients had HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

CONCLUSION

The benefit associated with ablation appears to be more modest in practice than that reported in the CASTLE-AF trial.

Risk of de-novo heart failure and competing risk in asymptomatic patients with structural heart diseases

AIMS

Asymptomatic patients with structural heart diseases are classified as a population at high risk for heart failure (HF) in Stage B. However, limited data are available regarding incidence and related factors of de-novo HF (DNHF) considering competing risk in this population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In 3362 Stage B patients (mean age 68 yrs, male 76%) from the CHART-2 Study (N = 10,219), we examined incidence of death and DNHF, defined as the first episode of either HF hospitalization or HF death, and factors related to DNHF.

RESULTS

During the median 6.0-year follow-up, 627 deaths (31/1000 person-years) and 293 DNHF (15/1000 person-years) occurred. Among the 627 deaths, 212 (34%) and 325 (52%) were specified as cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular deaths, respectively. During the follow-up of 271 DNHF hospitalizations, we observed 124 deaths, including 65 (52%) cardiovascular and 47 (40%) non-cardiovascular deaths. The competing risk model showed that age, diabetes mellitus, stroke, atrial fibrillation, diastolic blood pressure, hemoglobin levels, estimated glomerular filtration ratio and left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly associated with DNHF. Bayesian structural equation modeling showed that many of these cardiac and non-cardiac variables contribute to DNHF by affecting each other, while diabetes mellitus was independently associated with DNHF.

CONCLUSIONS

Stage B patients had a high incidence of DNHF as well as that of death due to both cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular causes. Thus, management of Stage B patients should include multidisciplinary approaches considering both cardiac and non-cardiac factors, in order to prevent DNHF as well as non-HF death as a competing risk.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00418041.

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in heart failure: clinical, prognostic, and echocardiographic outcome

PURPOSE

Catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) in heart failure (HF) patients is associated with a lower rate of cardiac events compared with medical therapy. This study deals with the clinical, echocardiographic, and prognostic outcomes in these patients. Prognostic scores, as MAGGIC (Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure) score, may help to predict the outcomes.

METHODS

From a single center, 47 patients with AF, HF, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% underwent CA. The primary endpoints were NYHA functional class, LVEF, and MAGGIC score.

RESULTS

The median age of patients was 59 years; 49% had paroxysmal AF. At 12 months, a significant improvement of NYHA class (median before II [interquartile range (IQR) II-III] vs median after I [IQR I-II]) and of LVEF (median before 44% [IQR 37-47] vs median after 55% [IQR49-57]) was observed (p value < 0.001). The MAGGIC 1-year and 3-year probability of death was estimated before (mean score 13 [IQR 11-17]) and at 12-month (mean score 11 [IQR 8-13]), showing a significant decrease in the probability of death (p value <0.001). At 12-month, a lower LVEF was associated with more HF hospitalizations (p value 0.035). Coronary artery disease (CAD) (HR 5, p value 0.035) and MAGGIC score (HR 1.2, p value 0.030) were predictors of HF hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

CA for AF in HF patients was associated with a significant improvement of NYHA functional class and LVEF and a higher life expectation. CAD history, LVEF < 40%, and MAGGIC score before ablation were predictors of HF hospitalization.

Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) commonly coexist in the same patient and either condition predisposes to the other. Several mechanisms promote the pathophysiological relationship between AF and HF, reducing quality of life, increasing the risk of stroke, and worsening HF progression. Although restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm would be ideal for those patients, several trials comparing rhythm and rate control failed to show a benefit of rhythm control strategy, achieved with pharmacological therapy, in terms of hospitalization for HF or death. Catheter ablation is a well-established option for symptomatic AF patients, resistant to drug therapy, with normal cardiac function. Several recent studies have shown an improvement in clinical outcomes after AF ablation in HF patients highlighting the emerging role of the invasive approach in this subset of patients. However, several concerns regarding patients’ selection and standardization of the procedure still remain to be addressed.

Impact of atrial fibrillation catheter ablation on mortality, stroke, and heart failure hospitalizations: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The impact of atrial fibrillation catheter ablation (AFCA) on hard clinical endpoints remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to conduct a random-effect model meta-analysis on efficacy data from high-quality large matched database/registry studies and randomized clinical trials. We compared long-term all-cause mortality, stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure in patients undergoing AFCA vs patients treated with medical therapy alone (rhythm and/or rate control medications) in a general AF population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases were screened and a total of nine studies were selected (one randomized clinical trial-CABANA-and eight large matched population studies). A total of 241 372 patients (27 711 in the ablation group, 213 661 in the nonablation group) were included. After a median follow-up of 3.5 years, AFCA decreased the risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.72; I² = 54%; number needed to treat [NNT] = 28), stroke (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.56-0.70; I²  = 23%; NNT = 59) and hospitalization for heart failure (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51-0.80; I²  = 28%; NNT = 33) compared with AF patients treated with medical therapy alone.

CONCLUSION

Based on the currently available efficacy and effectiveness evidence, AFCA significantly reduces the risk of death, stroke, and hospitalization compared with medical therapy alone.

Safety and efficacy of catheter ablation in atrial fibrillation patients with left ventricular dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) in heart failure (HF) patients reduced the mortality but may increase complications and raise the safety concern.

HYPOTHESIS

CA for AF in HF patients may not increase the complications vs medical treatment, and it may reduce hospitalizations and mortality and improve heart function.

METHODS

Three groups of AF patients were included in the study: 120 congestive HF for their first CA (AFHF-CA), 150 congestive HF who were undergoing medical therapy (AFHF-Med), and 150 patients with normal left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) (AF-CA).

RESULTS

After 30 ± 6 months of follow up, 45.8% of patients in the AFHF-CA and 61.3% of patients in the AF-CA groups maintained sinus rhythm (SR) in comparison with 2.7% in AFHF-Med (P < .01). Hospitalization for HF was significantly lower in AFHF-CA than in AFHF-Med groups (P < .01). Death occurred in 7.5% of patients in the AFHF-CA group, which was lower than 18% in the AFHF-Med group (P < .01). Significant improvements in heart function were shown in the AFHF-CA group compared to the AFHF-Med group, including LVEF (P < .01), LV end-diastolic diameter (P < .01), and New York Heart Association classification (P < .01), as well as the left atrial diameter (P < .01). AFHF-CA patients required additional ablation more often (P < .05). CA had a better prognosis in paroxysmal AF and tachycardia-related diseases.

CONCLUSION

CA for AF reduced hospitalizations and mortality and improved heart function, vs medical treatment, and was as safe as CA in those with normal heart function.

Cabins, castles, and constant hearts: rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation

Recent innovations have the potential to improve rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Controlled trials provide new evidence on the effectiveness and safety of rhythm control therapy, particularly in patients with AF and heart failure. This review summarizes evidence supporting the use of rhythm control therapy in patients with AF for different outcomes, discusses implications for indications, and highlights remaining clinical gaps in evidence. Rhythm control therapy improves symptoms and quality of life in patients with symptomatic AF and can be safely delivered in elderly patients with comorbidities (mean age 70 years, 3-7% complications at 1 year). Atrial fibrillation ablation maintains sinus rhythm more effectively than antiarrhythmic drug therapy, but recurrent AF remains common, highlighting the need for better patient selection (precision medicine). Antiarrhythmic drugs remain effective after AF ablation, underpinning the synergistic mechanisms of action of AF ablation and antiarrhythmic drugs. Atrial fibrillation ablation appears to improve left ventricular function in a subset of patients with AF and heart failure. Data on the prognostic effect of rhythm control therapy are heterogeneous without a clear signal for either benefit or harm. Rhythm control therapy has acceptable safety and improves quality of life in patients with symptomatic AF, including in elderly populations with stroke risk factors. There is a clinical need to better stratify patients for rhythm control therapy. Further studies are needed to determine whether rhythm control therapy, and particularly AF ablation, improves left ventricular function and reduces AF-related complications.

Methodological and Clinical Heterogeneity and Extraction Errors in Meta-Analyses of Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure

Background

Meta‐analyses are expected to follow a standardized process, and thus, they have become highly formulaic, although there is little evidence that such regimentation yields high‐quality results.

Methods and Results

This article describes the results of a critical examination of 14 published meta‐analyses of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in heart failure that were based on a nearly identical core set of 4 to 6 primary trials. Methodological issues included (1) the neglect of primary data or the failure to report any primary data; (2) the inaccurate recording of the number of randomized patients; (3) the lack of attention to data missingness or baseline imbalances; (4) the failure to contact investigators of primary trials for additional data; (5) the incorrect extraction of data, the misidentification of events, and the assignment of events to the wrong treatment groups; (6) the calculation of summary estimates based on demonstrably heterogenous data, methods of differing reliability, or unrelated end points; and (7) the development of conclusions based on sparse numbers of events or overly reliant on the results of 1 dominant trial.

Conclusions

These findings reinforce existing concerns about the methodological validity of meta‐analyses and their current status in the hierarchy of medical evidence, and they raise new questions about the process by which meta‐analyses undergo peer review by medical journals.

Cryoballoon Ablation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: An Evaluation of Cohorts With and Without Structural Heart Disease

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the most widely adopted strategy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) ablation. Limited evidence on acute results and late outcomes of cryoballoon (CB)-PVI in patients with structural heart disease (SHD) exist. The aim of this analysis was to compare acute procedural results and the 1-year recurrence rate of a single CB-PVI procedure in a PAF population with and without SHD.

METHOD

From April 2012 to May 2017, a total of 2,031 patients with AF underwent CB-PVI and were followed prospectively in the framework of the One Shot TO Pulmonary vein isolation (1STOP) ClinicalService project, involving 36 Italian cardiology centres. We identified patients with SHD according to criteria proposed by current ESC guidelines: left ventricular (LV) systolic or diastolic dysfunction, long-standing hypertension with LV hypertrophy, and/or other structural heart disease. Data on procedural outcomes and long-term freedom from AF recurrence were evaluated.

RESULTS

Our population consisted of 1,452 patients, of whom 282 (19.4%) were classified as having SHD. Compared to non-SHD patients, the SHD cohort was older (mean ± standard deviation, 62.9 ± 9.0 vs 58.2 ± 11.4 years; p < 0.001), was more frequently male (79.1% vs 69.8%; p < 0.002), had a higher thrombo-embolic risk (CHA₂DS₂VASc ≥2: 63.4% vs 40.2%; p < 0.001), had a higher body mass index (27.7 ± 3.9 vs 26.4 ± 3.9 kg/m²; p < 0.001), had a larger atrial diameter (43.8 ± 7.0 vs 40.2 ± 5.8 mm; p < 0.001), and had a lower LV ejection fraction (57.2 ± 7.7% vs 60.7 ± 6.0%; p < 0.001). At the time of ablation, 73% of patients were on class Ic or III anti-arrhythmic drugs. Procedure time (106.9 ± 41.5 vs 112.1 ± 46.8 min; p = 0.248), fluoroscopic time (28.7 ± 14.7 vs 28.6 ± 15.2 min; p = 0.819), and complication rate (3.9% vs 4.8%; p = 0.525) were not different between the SHD and non-SHD cohorts. However, the acute success rate (98.9% vs 97.7%; p = 0.016) was higher in patients with SHD. After a follow-up of 13.4 ± 12.8 months, freedom from symptomatic recurrence was 78.0% for SHD and 78.4% for non-SHD (p = 0.895). Recurrence rate was not related to either left atrial size or LVEF. In the SHD cohort, Class Ic or III anti-arrhythmic drugs treatment decreased from 70.7% of patients before ablation to 28.7% of patients after CB-PVI (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CB-PVI was extensively applied to treat patients with PAF. Unlike previous PVI experiences, the acute success and recurrence rate after a single procedure was not related to the presence of SHD or to the degree of cardiac remodelling. Further studies are required to define whether CB-PVI has a useful role in patients with a significantly reduced ejection fraction as those patients were under-represented in the current population.

Catheter ablation in atrial fibrillation: is there a mortality benefit in patients with diabetes and heart failure?

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commonly sustained arrhythmia, and patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) exhibit an increased incidence of AF. Besides DM, heart failure (HF) shares pathophysiological links with AF, mainly related to the pathological remodeling of hearts affected by structural disease. As in a vicious circle, AF may contribute to HF worsening and increased mortality in patients with structural heart diseases, and the outcome may be further impaired when concomitant DM is present. Although no data directly referring to DM patients with HF are available, indirect information can be drawn from large studies on patients with HF and AF. The present review discusses the outcome of AF ablation in patients with DM and HF, focusing on safety, efficacy, and most particularly on hard endpoints such as mortality and thromboembolic event incidence.

Correlation between the left atrial low-voltage area and the cardiac function improvement after catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

The impact of the left atrial low-voltage area (LVA) on the cardiac function improvement following ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear.

METHODS

In 49 patients with paroxysmal AF who underwent ablation, the left ventricular stroke volume index (SVI) was repeatedly measured using an impedance cardiography until 6 months after ablation. We defined the cardiac function improvement as a 20% increase in the SVI. The LVA (the area with the voltage amplitude of <0.5 mV) was assessed before ablation.

RESULTS

The reduced baseline SVI (<33 mL/m2) was observed in 18 (37%) patients. The SVI increased following ablation (from 36 ± 5 to 39 ± 6 mL/m2, P < .001). We observed the cardiac function improvement in 14 (29%) patients. The LVA was smaller in patients with the improved cardiac function than in those without (8.3% ± 5.2% vs 14.0% ± 8.5%, P = .026). The multivariate analysis revealed that only the LVA was independently associated with the cardiac function improvement (odds ratio, 0.878; 95% confidence interval: 0.778-0.991, P = .036). Furthermore, LVAs of the anterior (7.9% ± 7.6% vs 18.2% ± 15.5%, P = .022), septal (12.0 ± 7.3% vs 20.7% ± 13.8%, P = .031), and roof walls (6.9% ± 6.0% vs 16.9% ± 15.2%, P = .022) were smaller in patients with the improved cardiac function than in those without.

CONCLUSIONS

The LVA was related to the cardiac function improvement following ablation in patients with paroxysmal AF.

Arrhythmia-Induced Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Heart failure affects 1–2% of the population and is associated with elevated morbidity and mortality. Cardiac arrhythmias are often a result of heart failure, but they can cause left-ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) as an arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy (AIC). This causal relationship should be borne in mind by the physician treating a patient with systolic heart failure in association with cardiac arrhythmia.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed (1987–2017) and on the recommendations in current guidelines.

RESULTS

The key criterion for the diagnosis of an AIC is the demonstration of a persistent arrhythmia (including pathological tachycardia) together with an LVSD whose origin cannot be explained on any other basis. Nearly any type of tachyarrhythmia or frequent ventricular extrasystoles can lead, if persistent, to a progressively severe LVSD. The underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms are incompletely understood; the increased ventricular rate, asynchronous cardiac contractions, and neurohumoral activation all seem to play a role. The most common precipitating factors are supraventricular tachycardias in children and atrial fibrillation in adults. Recent studies have shown that the causal significance of atrial fibrillation in otherwise unexplained LVSD is underappreciated. The treatment of AIC consists primarily of the treatment of the underlying arrhythmia, generally with drugs such as beta-blockers and amiodarone. Depending on the type of arrhythmia, catheter ablation for long-term treatment should also be considered where appropriate. The diagnosis of AIC is considered to be well established when the LVSD normalizes or improves within a few weeks or months of the start of targeted treatment of the arrhythmia.

CONCLUSION

An AIC is potentially reversible. The timely recognition of this condition and the appropriate treatment of the underlying arrhythmia can substantially improve patient outcomes.