[Atrial fibrillation and the limits of oral anticoagulation: for whom are left atrial appendage occluders suitable?] / Vorhofflimmern und Grenzen der oralen Antikoagulation ­ für wen eignen sich Vorhofohrokkluder?

BACKGROUND: Patients with atrial fibrillation are at a significantly increased risk of thromboembolic events, especially ischemic strokes. Oral anticoagulation reduces this risk, but cannot be used in some patients for various reasons and is associated with a relevantly increased risk of bleeding. As an alternative for prophylaxis of thromboembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation, there are different options of left atrial appendage closure. AIM: This article explains the possibilities of interventional atrial occlusion as well as the suitable patient clientele using an overview of the currently available systems for atrial occlusion, a guideline for patient selection and a summary of the current scientific data. CONCLUSION AND AVAILABLE SCIENTIFIC DATA: In carefully selected patients suffering from atrial fibrillation with relative or absolute contraindications for oral anticoagulation, interventional closure of the atrial appendage is a safe alternative for prophylaxis against thromboembolic events. The currently available scientific evidence from randomized controlled trials is sparse. Nevertheless, extensive amounts of registry study data suggest a benefit, while the results of several large randomized controlled trials are expected in the coming years.

First-line catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: outcome of radiofrequency vs. cryoballoon pulmonary vein isolation.

AIMS: First-line ablation prior to antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy is an option for symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF); however, the optimal ablation technique, radiofrequency (RF), or cryoballoon (CB) has to be determined. METHODS AND RESULTS: The FREEZE Cohort Study compares RF and CB ablation. Treatment-naïve patients were documented in the FREEZEplus Registry. Periprocedural data and outcome were analysed. From 2011 to 2014, a total of 373/4184 (8.9%) patients with PAF naïve to AAD were identified. Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was performed with RF (n = 180) or CB (n = 193). In the RF group, patients were older (65 vs. 61 years, P < 0.01) compared with the CB group. The procedure time was significantly shorter and radiation exposure higher in the CB group. Major adverse events occurred in 1.6% (CB) and 3.7% (RF) of patients (P = 0.22). AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) recurrence until discharge was 4.5% (RF) and 8.5% (CB, P = 0.2). Follow-up (FU) ≥12 months was available in 99 (RF) and 107 (CB) patients. After 1.4 years of FU, freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) was 61% (RF) and 71% (CB, P = 0.11). In the RF group, more patients underwent cardioversion, and a trend for more repeat ablations was observed. Persistent phrenic nerve palsy was observed in one patient treated by CB. CONCLUSION: First-line ablation for PAF is safe and effective with either RF or CB. The procedure was faster with the CB, but the radiation exposure was higher. Although there was a trend for more recurrences and complications in the RF group, a more favourable risk profile in patients undergoing CB ablation might have biased the results. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01360008.

Left Atrial Appendage Conduction Jump for Real-Time Evaluation of Conduction Block Over the Anterior Mitral Annulus Line.

INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of conduction over a linear ablation lesion at the anterior mitral annulus can be time-consuming and difficult during ongoing radiofrequency application. The purpose of this study was to validate conduction time from the beginning of the p wave and from the coronary sinus ostium to the left atrial appendage (LAA) as a new method of conduction block surveillance. METHODS: Conduction across the anterior mitral annulus line was evaluated using a total of 55 patients. We verified completeness of conduction block by standard techniques including differential pacing, double potential mapping and activation mapping. Those methods were compared to the new method of observing an abrupt prolongation of conduction time into the LAA as well as a conduction sequence change on a circular multipolar mapping catheter placed inside the LAA during sinus rhythm. RESULTS: Bidirectional conduction block across the ablated line was achieved in 51 (92.7%) of the patients. Prior to ablation, mean conduction time across the line was 59 ± 21 milliseconds. This value increased to 163 ± 43 milliseconds after a successful ablation. An abrupt prolongation of conduction time into the LAA of at least 50 milliseconds was observed in all patients at the moment when a complete conduction block was achieved. Additionally, a change of conduction sequence recorded with the multi-electrode catheter placed in the LAA was observed in all of these patients. CONCLUSIONS: A sudden jump of p wave and coronary sinus ostium to LAA conduction time together with a change of conduction sequence recorded with a multi-electrode catheter placed inside the LAA during sinus rhythm is a simple and reliable approach for beat-to-beat surveillance of conduction block across the anterior mitral annulus during radiofrequency ablation.

Impact of atrial fibrillation on 1-year outcome in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator: results from the German DEVICE Registry.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a cardiac arrhythmia frequently documented in patients requiring implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and/or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D). Patients with diagnosed AF at the point of ICD or CRT-D implantation may have an impaired follow-up outcome. Methods: The German DEVICE I-II registry is a nationwide prospective multicentre database of patients implanted with ICD and CRT-D with clinical follow-up data. We analysed a 1-year follow up of implanted patients with AF and with sinus rhythm (SR). Results: A total of 4,929 ICD/CRT patients are included in the present analysis: 946 (19.2%) were in AF and 3,983 (80.8%) were SR at time of device implantation. AF patients had a significantly more comorbid profile including older age {72 [interquartile range (IQR), 66-77] vs. 66 (IQR, 56-73) years; P<0.001}, and higher rate of patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <30% (68.2% vs. 61.0%; P<0.001), peripheral artery disease (4.5% vs. 2.7%; P=0.002), diabetes (33.6% vs. 25.5%; P<0.001), hypertension (58.4% vs. 51.1%; P<0.001) and renal failure (22.6% vs. 15.3%; P<0.001). The intra-hospital complication rate was 4.3% in the AF and 3.6% in the SR group (P=0.38). In 1-year follow-up AF patients experienced a significantly higher rate of defibrillator shocks (25% vs. 15.3%; P<0.001). One-year estimated mortality was 10.8% in the AF and 5.9% in the SR group (P<0.001), while estimated 1-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) rate was 11.2% vs. 7.0% (P<0.001). The effects of AF on electrical shocks and mortality persisted after adjusting for age, sex, advanced New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, severely impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), coronary artery disease (CAD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes mellitus (DM), chronic renal failure (CRF), QRS duration, and type of indication for electronic device implantation. Conclusions: Our clinical data on an extended cohort of contemporary patients confirm the significant impact of AF, and its associated comorbidities, upon mortality and major adverse events after implantation of ICD/CRT.