Multiple procedure outcomes for nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation: Left atrial posterior wall isolation versus stepwise ablation.
atrial fibrillation
catheter ablation
contact-force sensing
posterior wall isolation
procedural outcomes
radiofrequency ablation
stepwise
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
ISSN: 1540-8167
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010756
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2020
12 2020
Historique:
received:
16
07
2020
revised:
15
09
2020
accepted:
22
09
2020
pubmed:
7
10
2020
medline:
29
7
2021
entrez:
6
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare multiple-procedure catheter ablation outcomes of a stepwise approach versus left atrial posterior wall isolation (LA PWI) in patients undergoing nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation (NPAF) ablation. Unfavorable outcomes for stepwise ablation of NPAF in large clinical trials may be attributable to proarrhythmic effects of incomplete ablation lines. It is unknown if a more extensive initial ablation strategy results in improved outcomes following multiple ablation procedures. Two hundred twenty two consecutive patients with NPAF underwent first-time ablation using a contact-force sensing ablation catheter utilizing either a stepwise (Group 1, n = 111) or LA PWI (Group 2, n = 111) approach. The duration of follow-up was 36 months. The primary endpoint was freedom from atrial arrhythmia >30 s. Secondary endpoints were freedom from persistent arrhythmia, repeat ablation, and recurrent arrhythmia after repeat ablation. There was similar freedom from atrial arrhythmias after index ablation for both stepwise and LA PWI groups at 36 months (60% vs. 69%, p = .1). The stepwise group was more likely to present with persistent recurrent arrhythmia (29% vs. 14%, p = .005) and more likely to undergo second catheter ablation (32% vs. 12%, p < .001) compared to LA PWI patients. Recurrent arrhythmia after repeat ablation was more likely in the stepwise group compared to the LA PWI group (15% vs. 4%, p = .003). Compared to a stepwise approach, LA PWI for patients with NPAF resulted in a similar incidence of any atrial arrhythmia, lower incidence of persistent arrhythmia, and fewer repeat ablations. Results for repeat ablation were not improved with a more extensive initial approach.
Sections du résumé
OBJECTIVE
To compare multiple-procedure catheter ablation outcomes of a stepwise approach versus left atrial posterior wall isolation (LA PWI) in patients undergoing nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation (NPAF) ablation.
BACKGROUND
Unfavorable outcomes for stepwise ablation of NPAF in large clinical trials may be attributable to proarrhythmic effects of incomplete ablation lines. It is unknown if a more extensive initial ablation strategy results in improved outcomes following multiple ablation procedures.
METHODS
Two hundred twenty two consecutive patients with NPAF underwent first-time ablation using a contact-force sensing ablation catheter utilizing either a stepwise (Group 1, n = 111) or LA PWI (Group 2, n = 111) approach. The duration of follow-up was 36 months. The primary endpoint was freedom from atrial arrhythmia >30 s. Secondary endpoints were freedom from persistent arrhythmia, repeat ablation, and recurrent arrhythmia after repeat ablation.
RESULTS
There was similar freedom from atrial arrhythmias after index ablation for both stepwise and LA PWI groups at 36 months (60% vs. 69%, p = .1). The stepwise group was more likely to present with persistent recurrent arrhythmia (29% vs. 14%, p = .005) and more likely to undergo second catheter ablation (32% vs. 12%, p < .001) compared to LA PWI patients. Recurrent arrhythmia after repeat ablation was more likely in the stepwise group compared to the LA PWI group (15% vs. 4%, p = .003).
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to a stepwise approach, LA PWI for patients with NPAF resulted in a similar incidence of any atrial arrhythmia, lower incidence of persistent arrhythmia, and fewer repeat ablations. Results for repeat ablation were not improved with a more extensive initial approach.
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3117-3123Informations de copyright
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
January CT, Wann LS, Alpert JS, et al. AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation. 2014;2014(130):e199-e267.
Natale A, Reddy VY, Monir G, et al. Paroxysmal AF catheter ablation with a contact force sensing catheter: results of the prospective, multicenter SMART-AF trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:647-656.
Conti S, Weerasooriya R, Novak P, et al. Contact force sensing for ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation: a randomized, multicenter trial. Heart Rhythm. 2018;15:201-208.
Vogler J, Willems S, Sultan A, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation versus defragmentation: the CHASE-AF clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:2743-2752.
Nair GM, Yeo C, MacDonald Z, et al. Three-year outcomes and reconnection patterns after initial contact force guided pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017;28:984-993.
Hussein AA, Barakat AF, Saliba WI, et al. Persistent atrial fibrillation ablation with or without contact force sensing. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017;28:483-488.
Verma A, Jiang C, Betts TR, et al. Approaches to catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1812-1822.
Barbhaiya CR, Knotts RJ, Bockstall K, et al. Contact-force radiofrequency ablation of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: improved outcomes with increased experience. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2019;58:69-75.
Calkins H, Kuck KH, Cappato R, et al. HRS/EHRA/ECAS expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: recommendations for patient selection, procedural techniques, patient management and follow-up, definitions, endpoints, and research trial design. Europace. 2012;2012(14):528-606.
O'Neill MD, Jaïs P, Takahashi Y, et al. The stepwise ablation approach for chronic atrial fibrillation--evidence for a cumulative effect. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2006;16:153-167.
Steven D, Sultan A, Reddy V, et al. Benefit of pulmonary vein isolation guided by loss of pace capture on the ablation line: results from a prospective 2-center randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:44-50.
Barbhaiya CR, Aizer A, Knotts R, et al. Simultaneous pace-ablate during CARTO-guided pulmonary vein isolation with a contact-force sensing radiofrequency ablation catheter. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2019;54:119-124.
Piorkowski C, Kottkamp H, Tanner H, et al. Value of different follow-up strategies to assess the efficacy of circumferential pulmonary vein ablation for the curative treatment of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2005;16:1286-1292.
Verma A, Champagne J, Sapp J, et al. Discerning the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic episodes of atrial fibrillation before and after catheter ablation (DISCERN AF): a prospective, multicenter study. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:149-156.
Andrade JG, Champagne J, Dubuc M, et al. Cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation assessed by continuous monitoring: a randomized clinical trial. Circulation. 2019;140:1779-1788.
Good ED, Rogers FJ. Patient-centered management of atrial fibrillation: applying evidence-based care to the individual patient. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2012;112:334-342.
Barbhaiya CR, Baldinger SH, Kumar S, et al. Downstream overdrive pacing and intracardiac concealed fusion to guide rapid identification of atrial tachycardia after atrial fibrillation ablation. Europace. 2017;20:596-603.
Scherr D, Khairy P, Miyazaki S, et al. Five-year outcome of catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation using termination of atrial fibrillation as a procedural endpoint. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2015;8:18-24.
Dong J-Z, Sang C-H, Yu R-H, et al. Prospective randomized comparison between a fixed “2C3L” approach vs. stepwise approach for catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation. Europace. 2015;17:1798-1806.
Lin H, Chen Y-H, Hou J-W, Lu Z-Y, Xiang Y, Li Y-G. Role of contact force-guided radiofrequency catheter ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017;28:994-1005.
Ullah W, McLean A, UK Multicentre Trials Group, et al. Randomized trial comparing pulmonary vein isolation using the SmartTouch catheter with or without real-time contact force data. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13:1761-1767.