Rhythm monitoring, success definition, recurrence, and anticoagulation after atrial fibrillation ablation: results from an EHRA survey.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major challenge for the healthcare field. Pulmonary vein isolation is the most effective treatment for the maintenance of sinus rhythm. However, clinical endpoints for the procedure vary significantly among studies. There is no consensus on the definition of recurrence and no clear roadmap on how to deal with recurrences after a failed ablation. The purpose of this study was to perform a survey in order to show how clinicians currently approach this knowledge gap. An online survey, supported by the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) Scientific Initiatives Committee, was conducted between 1 April 2022 and 8 May 2022. An anonymous questionnaire was disseminated via social media and EHRA newsletters, for clinicians to complete. This consisted of 18 multiple-choice questions regarding rhythm monitoring, definitions of a successful ablation, clinical practices after a failed AF ablation, and the continuance of anticoagulation. A total of 107 replies were collected across Europe. Most respondents (82%) perform routine monitoring for AF recurrences after ablation, with 51% of them preferring a long-term monitoring strategy. Cost was reported to have an impact on the choice of monitoring strategy. Self-screening was recommended by most (71%) of the respondents. The combination of absence of symptoms and recorded AF was the definition of success for most (83%) of the respondents. Cessation of anticoagulation after ablation was an option mostly for patients with paroxysmal AF and a low CHA2DS2-VASc score. The majority of physicians perform routine monitoring after AF ablation. For most physicians, the combination of the absence of symptoms and electrocardiographic endpoints defines a successful result after AF ablation.

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest: A.A. received consulting fees and speaking honoraria from Boston Scientific Inc., Farapulse Inc., Galaxy MedicalInc., and Biosense & Webster Contracted research from Boston Scientific Inc., Farapulse Inc., Galaxy Medical Inc., Biosense & Webster. M.M.F. received proctoring/speaker fees from BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, Abbott, and Boston Scientific. S.B. is consultant for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Microport, and Zoll. J.G. has served as consultant for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Microport, and Abbott, received speaker fees from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Abbott, and received a research grant from Abbott.