Comparison of pulsed-field ablation versus very high power short duration-ablation for pulmonary vein isolation.

BACKGROUND: The newly introduced nonthermal pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a promising technology to achieve fast pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with high acute success rates and good safety features. However, previous studies have shown that very high power short duration ablation (VHPSD) is also highly effective and fast to achieve PVI with potentially less arrhythmia recurrence compared to conventional radiofrequency ablation. Data comparing PFA to VHPSD-PVI is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study compared procedural and outcome data for PFA-PVI to VHPSD-PVI in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (PAF/persAF). METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing de novo PVI (PFA or VHPSD) were included in this analysis. For PFA-PVI a pentaspline 20 electrode catheter was used. For VHPSD-PVI an enhanced irrigated catheter with a power setting of 70 W/7 s (70 W/5 s at posterior wall) was employed in conjunction with electro-anatomical mapping. All procedures were performed in deep analgo-sedation. RESULTS: A total of n = 114 patients (n = 57[50%] PFA, n = 17[30%] PAF; n = 40[70%] persAF) were included in this analysis. PVI was successful in all patients. The PFA group revealed a significantly shorter procedure duration (65 ± 17 min vs. 95 ± 23 min, p < 0.01) but longer fluoroscopy time (PFA 15 ± 5 min and VHPSD 12 ± 3 min; p < 0.001). At follow-up after median 125 days (interquartile range: 109-162) n = 46 PFA (80.7%) and n = 44 VHPSD pts (77.2%) were free from atrial arrhythmia after a single procedure (p = 0.819). Two tamponades occurred in the PFA while in VHPSD two pts suffered groin bleedings. One clinically nonsignificant PV stenosis occurred in the VHPSD group. CONCLUSION: Pulsed-field ablation and VHPSD-PVI seem to be highly effective and safe to achieve PVI in the setting of PAF and persAF with comparable arrhythmia-free survival. However, procedure duration for PFA PVI is significantly shorter and therefore may be of potential benefit. Compared to PFA VHPSD-PVI might ensure information on left atrial substrate allowing to target concomitant secondary tachycardias.

Comparison of pulsed field ablation and cryoballoon ablation for pulmonary vein isolation.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the cornerstone in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). PVI using cryoballoon (CB) technology has emerged as a standard procedure in many centers. Recently, pulsed field ablation (PFA) has been introduced and used to achieve PVI. First data show high acute and favorable long-term outcomes. So far, data comparing these new "single shot" devices are sparse. We sought to compare procedural and outcome data for first time PFA users versus CB in patients undergoing de novo PVI. Furthermore, potentially postprocedural discomfort and affection of autonomic ganglia were assessed. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective analysis and comparison of all de novo PVIs with PFA and CB was performed. Furthermore, PFA PVI learning curve was evaluated. During follow-up, repeat outpatient visits and Holter electrocardiogram were performed to analyze arrhythmia-free survival. Discomfort analysis was obtained by prescribed analgesic medication within first 48 h after PVI. Potential changes in heart rate (HR) between baseline and at 3-month follow-up were evaluated. A total of 108 patients (54 PFA and 54 CB; PFA; 33 (30%) female) with paroxysmal and persistent AF were analyzed. Type of AF was comparable (Patients suffering from PAF: PFA: 16 (30%), CB: 17 (31%), p = 1.0). In 107 (99%) patients, successful PVI was achieved. Transient phrenic palsy omitted complete PVI in one CB patient. A trend for a shorter overall procedure duration was observed in the PFA group (PFA: 64.5 ± 17.5 min; CB: 73.0 ± 24.8 min; p = 0.07). Excluding LA mapping time (first 14 cases), procedure time was significantly shorter using PFA (PFA: 58.0 ± 12.5 min, CB: 73.0 ± 24.8 min, p = 0.0001). Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer for PFA (PFA: 15.3 ± 4.7 min, CB: 12.3 ± 5.3 min; p = 0.001), but significantly less contrast medium was used (PFA: 12 ± 6 mL; CB: 51 ± 29 mL, p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis of the PFA group revealed a significant shortening of procedure duration over time (first tertile: 72.7 ± 13.5 min, second tertile: 67.3 ± 21.7 min, third tertile: 53.4 ± 9.8 min, first vs. third tertile p < 0.0001). Two cardiac tamponades occurred in the PFA group (p = 0.495), of which one was most likely related to complex transseptal puncture. In the first 48 h after PVI, the number of prescribed analgesics due to postprocedural pain was equal between both groups (PFA: 7 (13%) patients, CB: 10 (19%) patients, p = 0.598). After a FU of 273 ± 129 days, 35 of 47 patients (74%) after PFA and 36 of 50 patients (72%) after CB PVI were free of any atrial arrhythmia (HR: 0.98, p = 0.88). Only in the PFA group, a significant increase in HR 3 months after PVI was observed (pre-PVI: 61 ± 8 beats/min, post-PVI: 65 ± 9 beats/min, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: The new PFA technology is equally effective and safe as compared to CB for complete PVI with potentially shorter procedure time and significantly less contrast medium. However, AF recurrence rates after PFA PVI seem to be comparable to CB PVI.

Implementation and first outcomes of a novel standard operating procedure for preprocedural transoesophageal echocardiography screening in course of atrial arrhythmia ablation.

AIMS: Preprocedural transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) screening for left atrial (LA) thrombi is the standard of care in many centres performing atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. However, TEE imposes procedural risks for patients and is often challenging to implement in daily practice, besides causing patient discomfort. At our centre, a novel standard operating procedure (SOP) was implemented, aiming to identify patients that can be exempt from TEE screening. We aimed to assess whether this screening approach may reduce preprocedural TEEs without imposing patients of higher risks for cerebrovascular events (CVEs). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data of 1874 consecutive patients treated by catheter ablation of LA arrhythmias between 2018 and 2022 were retrospectively analysed. A cohort of 937 patients, where decision to perform TEE screening was based on a new SOP (considering rhythm at admission, CHA2DS2-VASc score, and sufficient anticoagulation), was compared to a matched cohort receiving TEE before every procedure. Number of performed TEEs and incidences of CVEs were compared. Implementation of the new SOP led to a 67% reduction in TEEs performed (old SOP: 933 vs. new SOP: 305). No significant differences between the groups were detected regarding transitory ischaemic attack (old SOP: 5 vs. new SOP: 3; P = 0.48) and stroke (no events). No solid thrombi were detected during TEE screening. CONCLUSION: The number of preprocedural screening TEEs before AF ablation procedures can be safely reduced by applying risk stratification based on rhythm at admission and CHA2DS2-VASc score, if anticoagulation was performed properly.

Dipole Density Guided Catheter Ablation versus Conventional Substrate Modification for Repeat Catheter Ablation of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.

AIMS: The optimal ablation strategy for recurrent persistent atrial fibrillation (persAF) after initially successful catheter ablation (CA) remains debatable. Dipole density (DD) guided CA using the AcQMap system has been proven to be feasible and effective in patients with persAF. So far, long-term outcome data for DD-guided CA in patients with recurrence of persAF are sparse. This study sought to assess long-term outcome data in patients undergoing a DD-guided CA for recurrence of persAF after previous CA in comparison to conventional repeat CA. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients undergoing DD-guided CA for recurrence of persAF after previous ablation were compared to patients undergoing conventional substrate modification (CSM). A total of 64 patients (32 DD-guided and 32 CSM) were included in this analysis. Procedure duration (DD: 236 ± 61 min; CSM: 198 ± 59 min; p = 0.004) and fluoroscopy time (DD: 36 ± 15 min; CSM: 20 ± 11 min; p = 0.0001) were significantly longer in the DD group. After a long-term median follow-up (FU) of 27 months (interquartile range 12.8-34.3), DD-guided CA was inferior to CSM regarding overall arrhythmia-free survival (DD: 6 patients (19%), CSM: 11 patients (34%); HR 1.47; p = 0.04). Freedom from AF did not differ between both groups (DD: 16 patients (50%); CSM: 18 patients (56%), HR 0.99, p = 0.47). During FU, more patients underwent repeat CA after DD-guided ablation (DD: 16 patients (50%), CSM: 7 patients (22%), p = 0.04). No major complications occurred overall. CONCLUSIONS: Dipole density-guided CA is equally safe but associated with longer procedure duration compared to conventional substrate modification for treatment of recurrent persAF after previous CA. Of note, long-term arrhythmia-free survival is significantly worse after DD-guided ablation, and more patients undergo redo procedures.

CYFRA 21-1: a suitable tumor marker in patients with head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma?

PURPOSE: The clinical significance of cytokeratin fraction 21-1 (CYFRA 21-1) for patients with head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) is unknown. Thus, the aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical value of CYFRA 21-1 in the context of treatment and follow-up for these patients. METHODS: The clinical, histological and laboratory data of a total of 55 patients with the first diagnosis of head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (T1-T4, N0-N2b, M0-1) between 2003 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. In 25 cases, the primary tumor could be treated successfully without residual or recurrent disease in the further course. The average follow-up period was 2.3 years. In all patients, pretherapeutic determination of CYFRA 21-1 was performed using the ECLIA test kit. The cut-off value was set at 3.3 ng/ml. RESULTS: In 18 patients (32.7%), regional recurrence was found in the course of treatment. Distant metastases could be observed in two patients (3.6%). In these cases, no significant increase of CYFRA 21-1 blood concentration was detected at the time of recurrence/metastasis. At the time of the first diagnosis, the mean value of CYFRA 21-1 blood concentration was 2.4 ng/ml; and in cases of regional recurrence or distant metastases, the initial mean CYFRA 21-1 concentration was 2.0 ng/ml. There was no statistically significant relationship between CYFRA 21-1 blood concentration and analyzed tumor characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: According to current knowledge, the tumor marker CYFRA 21-1 is not clinically significant for treatment and follow-up of patients with head and neck CSCC.