The Convergent Procedure - A Standardised and Anatomic Approach Addresses the Clinical and Economic Unmet Needs of the Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Population

Robotic-enhanced hybrid ablation for persistent and long-standing atrial fibrillation: Early assessment of feasibility, safety, and efficacy

Objectives

To assess feasibility, safety, and early efficacy of robotic-enhanced epicardial ablation (RE-EA) as first stage of a hybrid approach to patients with persistent (PsAF) and long-standing atrial fibrillation (LSAF).

Methods

Single-center, retrospective analysis of patients with documented PsAF and LSAF who underwent RE-EA followed by catheter-guided endocardial ablation. Postoperatively, patients were monitored for major adverse events and underwent rhythm follow-up at 3 and 12 months.

Results

Between January 2021 and June 2023, we performed RE-EA in 64 patients (73.5% male, CHA2DS2-VASc 2.7 ± 1.6, BMI 34.1 ± 6.3 kg/m2). Mean AF preoperative duration and left atrial volume index were, respectively, 85 months and 47.5 mL/m2. Through the robotic approach, the intended lesion set was completed in all patients without cardiopulmonary bypass support, conversion to thoracotomy/sternotomy, blood transfusions, or perioperative mortality. The average LOS was 1.7 days, with only 1 patient requiring intensive care unit admission and >65% of patients discharged within 24 hours. At follow-up, 2 (3.1%) patients experienced new left pleural effusion or hemidiaphragm paralysis requiring treatment. There were no readmissions related to AF, stroke, thromboembolic events, or deaths. The mean interval between the epicardial and endocardial stages of the procedure was 5.9 months. Rhythm follow-up showed AF resolution in 73.4% and 71.9% of patients at 3 and 12 months, respectively.

Conclusions

RE-EA is a feasible and safe, first-stage approach for the treatment of patients with PsAF and LSAF. It improves exposure of the intended targets, favors short hospital stay, and facilitates return to activity with satisfactory AF treatment in the short term.

Patient Selection for Epicardial Ablation-Part I: The Role of Epicardial Ablation in Various Cardiac Disease States

Epicardial catheter ablation is most commonly performed following unsuccessful endocardial ablation. Given the frequency of epicardial substrates in certain cardiomyopathic disease states, however, a combined endocardial–epicardial approach should be considered as a primary treatment strategy. Although epicardial ablation is primarily deployed in patients with ventricular arrhythmias, the role of epicardial approaches in supraventricular tachycardias (eg, atrial fibrillation, inappropriate sinus tachycardia, and—rarely—accessory pathways) is growing, with continued advances being made.

Convergent epicardial-endocardial ablation for treatment of long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: A review of literature

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF STUDY

The convergent procedure (CVP) is a hybrid ablation technique via a subxiphoid incision that has recently emerged as a treatment option for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (npAF). By combining endocardial and epicardial ablation into a simultaneous or staged procedure, the pulmonary vein and posterior left atrium can be isolated with transmural lesion sets while minimizing the risk of proarrhythmic gaps that are a known limitation with endocardial linear lesion sets. We reviewed the 12-month outcomes in patients who underwent CVP compared to those who underwent endocardial catheter ablation (CA) and surgical ablation (SA).

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the PubMed database for publications related to CVP. Selected studies included detailed 12-month follow-up of patients, patient characteristics, periprocedural complications, use of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs), and monitoring method.

RESULTS

Five studies with 340 patients who underwent CVP between January 2009 and March 2017 were selected for this review. A total of 8.5% of patients had paroxysmal AF (pAF), 42.2% had persistent AF (peAF), and 49.1% had long-standing persistent AF (lspAF). At 12 months, 81.9% of patients were in sinus rhythm, while 54.1% of patients were in sinus rhythm while not taking AADs. The overall complication rate was 10%.

CONCLUSION

CVP had better 1-year efficacy in eliminating AF when compared to CA. However, SA, specifically the Cox Maze IV, had lower rates of AF recurrence in the npAF patient population. Despite its promising 1-year efficacy rates, the periprocedural complication rate for CVP was significantly higher than both CA and SA.