Atrial Pacemaker Complex Preserved Radiofrequency Maze Procedure Reducing the Incidence of Sick Sinus Syndrome in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Long-term results of radiofrequency maze procedure for persistent atrial fibrillation with concomitant mitral surgery

Background

The radiofrequency (RF) maze procedure can effectively restore sinus rhythm in most patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) and mitral disease. However, long-term results and predictors for late AF recurrence are still under investigation.

Methods

From December 1995 to November 2011, 207 consecutive patients with persistent AF and mitral disease underwent RF maze procedure and concomitant mitral surgery. The mean age was 54±12.4 year-old. Mitral surgery was performed in all patients and concomitant procedures including tricuspid surgery, aortic valve surgery, and atrial septal defect closure were carried on 164 patients.

Results

The in-hospital mortality was 3.9% (n=8) and late mortality was 8.2% (n=17). After a mean follow-up period of 101±50.9 months, 154 patients (74.4%) had long-term sinus conversion. A permanent pacer was implanted in 8 patients (3.9%). By Cox multivariate survival regression analysis, predictors for long-term sinus conversion were identified to be the duration of persistent AF, preoperative left atrial (LA) diameter, preoperative right atrial (RA) area, and preoperative beta-blocker use. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that the best cutoff value for persistent AF duration, preoperative LA diameter, and preoperative RA area were 59.5 months, 59.85 mm, and 25.65 cm².

Conclusions

Longer persistent AF duration, larger preoperative LA diameter, larger preoperative RA area and preoperative beta-blocker use were the predictors for negative long-term outcome of RF maze procedure for the patients with persistent AF underwent concomitant mitral surgery. Timely referral of patients for surgery is mandatory.

Should We Ablate Atrial Fibrillation During Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Aortic Valve Replacement?

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in patients with AF undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or aortic valve replacement (AVR) or both.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study of patients with AF presenting for CABG or AVR or both between 2009 and 2013. They were divided into an ablation group that underwent concomitant AF ablation and a control group that did not. Follow-up data were obtained using telephone interviews. The data were 100% complete with a median follow-up of 30 months.

RESULTS

A total of 375 patients with AF presented for CABG (44%), AVR (27%), or CABG and AVR (29%). The ablation (129 patients) and control (246 patients) groups had similar baseline characteristics. The ablation group had significantly longer cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times, adding a mean of 31 ± 3 and 22 ± 3 minutes (p < 0.01 for both), respectively. There were similar unadjusted rates of hospital mortality (4.7% versus 5.3%, p = 0.79), stroke (3.1% versus 3.3%, p = 0.94), and reopening (4.7% versus 6.5%, p = 0.46) between the groups. The intensive care and hospital length of stays were similar. The ablation group had a lower incidence of postoperative AF (27% versus 78%, p < 0.01). Adjusted operative mortality was similar, but the intervention group had significantly lower odds of postoperative AF (odds ratio 0.11, p < 0.01). Although there was no difference in mid-term survival, the ablation group had higher mid-term AF-free survival (p < 0.01) and a trend toward higher anticoagulation-free (p = 0.09) and stroke-free survival (p = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant AF ablation in patients with AF undergoing CABG or AVR or both does not increase perioperative rates of mortality or morbidity. Moreover, concomitant AF ablation is effective at reducing postoperative AF burden and increases mid-term AF-free survival.

Incidence and predictors of pacemaker placement after surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Bradyarrhythmia requiring pacemaker placement is a relatively common complication after surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). We report our experience with surgical ablation procedures using various energy modalities and lesion sets in an attempt to identify the risk factors associated with postoperative pacemaker requirement.

METHODS

Intraoperative data were collected prospectively, and preoperative and postoperative data were collected retrospectively. Energy modality and lesion sets used were dependent on availability on the date of the procedure and surgeon preference.

RESULTS

From October 1999 to October 2009, 701 patients underwent surgical ablation for AF at our institution. Forty-five patients (7.6%) required early postoperative pacemaker placement. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics or associated procedures between patients who required pacemaker placement and those who did not. Ninety-day mortality was greater in patients requiring pacemaker placement (15.6% versus 6.6%; p = 0.025). In multivariable analysis, a pacemaker requirement was more likely with the use of microwave energy (odds ratio [OR] 2.87; confidence interval [CI], 1.41 to 5.84; p = 0.004) and a right atrial lesion set (OR, 2.82; CI, 1.07 to 7.45; p = 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, over our 10-year experience with surgical AF ablations, the incidence of pacemaker requirement was much lower than that reported in series of classic "cut and sew" Maze procedures, even among patients undergoing full biatrial ablations. Although biatrial ablation is currently our favored approach to patients with long-standing or persistent AF, right atrial lesion sets increase the risk of this complication and should be used judiciously.

Role of the Simultaneous Sequential Strategy for Failed Acute Sinus Restoration after Modified Left Maze Procedure for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation with Concomitant Mitral Surgery

BACKGROUND

We assessed whether the simultaneous sequential strategy could (1) achieve additional sinus restoration for those patients who were not in sinus rhythm while coming off bypass after modified left maze procedure and (2) attain the same long-term success rates as the bi-atrial maze procedure in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) and mitral valve disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-seven consecutive patients - ten men and 17 women with a mean age of 52 +/- 13 years, all with persistent AF and mitral valve disease - underwent the modified maze procedure with the simultaneous sequential strategy. In the first phase, the modified left atrial maze operation was carried out with concomitant valvular surgery; the right side maze operation was subsequently carried out as a second phase of the sequential strategy only if AF re-appeared following the spontaneous restoration of heart beats during the operation.

RESULTS

Twenty patients (74.1%) underwent the left atrial maze procedure only, and seven patients (25.9%) required the subsequent right atrial maze procedure as part of the sequential strategy. At a mean follow-up of 15.1 +/- 7.7 months, six of the 27 patients (22.2%) who underwent additional right atrial maze procedure had restored sinus rhythm. At a mean follow-up of 17.8 +/- 7.3 months, 24 of the 27 patients (88.9%) had restored sinus rhythm and 22 patients (81.5%) had restored bi-atrial transport function (right atrial filling fraction: 40.8 +/- 11.7%; left atrial filling fraction: 22.9 +/- 8.1%) after application of the sequential strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with modified left atrial maze procedure, the application of the simultaneous sequential strategy successfully restored sinus rhythm in an additional 22.2% of patients with persistent AF. The overall sinus conversion rate of 88.9% was comparable with that of the standard bi-atrial maze procedure.