Delta QRS and outcomes post CRT in the Resynchronization-Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure Trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and prolonged QRS duration, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can improve cardiac electromechanical synchrony and prevent adverse clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to investigate the role of delta QRS duration (ΔQRSd) in predicting clinical response to CRT. METHODS: The RAFT (Resynchronization-Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure Trial) study randomized 1798 patients to CRT with defibrillator or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator alone. Those who received CRT and had electrocardiograms available at baseline and after CRT implantation were included in this analysis. ΔQRSd was calculated as the absolute difference between QRS duration at baseline and with CRT pacing. The primary outcome was the composite of death and heart failure hospitalization. RESULTS: There were 813 patients included in this analysis. The median age was 67 years, and 125 patients (15.2%) were female. The median ΔQRSd was -2 ms (-20 to 18 ms), and 447 (55%) patients had a ΔQRSd ≤0 after implantation. ΔQRSd was an independent predictor of the composite outcome for patients with CRT (hazard ratio, 1.012; 95% confidence interval, 1.008-1.017). CRT recipients with ΔQRSd >0 had higher rates of the composite outcome than patients randomized to implantable cardioverter-defibrillator alone. CONCLUSION: For patients receiving CRT for heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and QRS prolongation, ΔQRSd was an independent predictor of long-term mortality and heart failure hospitalization.

A randomized clinical trial of catheter ablation and antiarrhythmic drug therapy for suppression of ventricular tachycardia in ischemic cardiomyopathy: The VANISH2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with prior myocardial infarction is associated with adverse quality of life and clinical outcomes, despite the presence of implanted defibrillators (ICDs). Suppression of recurrent VT can be accomplished with antiarrhythmic drug therapy or catheter ablation. The Ventricular Tachycardia Antiarrhythmics or Ablation In Structural Heart Disease 2 (VANISH2) trial is designed to determine whether ablation is superior to antiarrhythmic drug therapy as first line therapy for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and VT. METHODS: The VANISH2 trial enrolls patients with prior myocardial infarction and VT (with one of: ≥1 ICD shock; ≥3 episodes treated with antitachycardia pacing (ATP) and symptoms; ≥5 episodes treated with ATP regardless of symptoms; ≥3 episodes within 24 hours; or sustained VT treated with electrical cardioversion or pharmacologic conversion). Enrolled patients are classified as either sotalol-eligible, or amiodarone-eligible, and then are randomized to either catheter ablation or to that antiarrhythmic drug therapy, with randomization stratified by drug-eligibility group. Drug therapy, catheter ablation procedures and ICD programming are standardized. All patients will be followed until two years after randomization. The primary endpoint is a composite of mortality at any time, appropriate ICD shock after 14 days, VT storm after 14 days, and treated sustained VT below detection of the ICD after 14 days. The outcomes will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle using survival analysis techniques RESULTS: The results of the VANISH2 trial are intended to provide data to support clinical decisions on how to suppress VT for patients with prior myocardial infarction. CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration NCT02830360.

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation in Heart Failure With Reduced vs Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Catheter ablation is associated with reduced heart failure (HF) hospitalization and death in select patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the benefit in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is uncertain. Objective: To investigate whether catheter ablation for AF is associated with reduced HF-related outcomes according to HF phenotype. Data Source: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central was conducted among studies published from inception to September 2023. Study Selection: Parallel-group randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing catheter ablation with conventional rate or rhythm control therapies in patients with HF, New York Heart Association functional class II or greater, and a history of paroxysmal or persistent AF were included. Pairs of independent reviewers screened 7531 titles and abstracts, of which 12 RCTs and 4 substudies met selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were abstracted in duplicate according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using random-effects Mantel-Haenszel models. Interaction P values were used to test for subgroup differences. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was HF events, defined as HF hospitalization, clinically significant worsening of HF, or unscheduled visits to a clinician for treatment intensification. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 12 RCTs with 2465 participants (mean [SD] age, 65.3 [9.7] years; 658 females [26.7%]) were included; there were 1552 participants with HFrEF and 913 participants with HFpEF. Compared with conventional rate or rhythm control, catheter ablation was associated with reduced risk of HF events in HFrEF (risk ratio [RR], 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.72), while there was no benefit in patients with HFpEF (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.65-1.32) (P for interaction = .03). Catheter ablation was associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular death compared with conventional therapies in HFrEF (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.34-0.70) but a differential association was not detected in HFpEF (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.46-1.79) (P for interaction = .12). Similarly, no difference in the association of catheter ablation with all-cause mortality was found between HFrEF (RR vs conventional therapies, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.86) and HFpEF (RR vs conventional therapies, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.39-2.30) groups (P for interaction = .39). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that catheter ablation for AF was associated with reduced risk of HF events in patients with HFrEF but had limited or no benefit in HFpEF. Results from ongoing trials may further elucidate the role of catheter ablation for AF in HFpEF.

Computerized clinical decision support to improve stroke prevention therapy in primary care management of atrial fibrillation: a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite guidelines supporting antithrombotic therapy use in atrial fibrillation (AF), under-prescribing persists. We assessed whether computerized clinical decision support (CDS) would enable guideline-based antithrombotic therapy for AF patients in primary care. METHODS: This cluster randomized trial of CDS versus usual care (UC) recruited participants from primary care practices across Nova Scotia, following them for 12 months. The CDS tool calculated bleeding and stroke risk scores and provided recommendations for using oral anticoagulants (OAC) per Canadian guidelines. RESULTS: From June 14, 2014 to December 15, 2016, 203 primary care providers (99 UC, 104 CDS) with access to high-speed Internet were recruited, enrolling 1,145 eligible patients (543 UC, 590 CDS) assigned to the same treatment arm as their provider. Patient mean age was 72.3 years; most were male (350, 64.5% UC, 351, 59.5% CDS) and from a rural area (298, 54.9% UC, 315, 53.4% CDS). At baseline, a higher than anticipated proportion of patients were receiving guideline-based OAC therapy (373, 68.7% UC, 442, 74.9% CDS; relative risk [RR] 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-1.07; P = .511)). At 12 months, prescription data were available for 538 usual care and 570 CDS patients, and significantly more CDS patients were managed according to guidelines (415, 77.1% UC, 479, 84.0% CDS; RR 1.08 (95% CI, 1.01-1.15; P = .024)). CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding high baseline rates, primary care provider access to the CDS over 12 months further optimized the prescribing of OAC therapy per national guidelines to AF patients potentially eligible to receive it. This suggests that CDS can be effective in improving clinical process of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT01927367. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01927367?term=NCT01927367&draw=2&rank=1.

Long-Term Outcomes of Resynchronization-Defibrillation for Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The Resynchronization-Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure Trial (RAFT) showed a greater benefit with respect to mortality at 5 years among patients who received cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) than among those who received implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). However, the effect of CRT on long-term survival is not known. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II or III heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% or less, and an intrinsic QRS duration of 120 msec or more (or a paced QRS duration of 200 msec or more) to receive either an ICD alone or a CRT defibrillator (CRT-D). We assessed long-term outcomes among patients at the eight highest-enrolling participating sites. The primary outcome was death from any cause; the secondary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, heart transplantation, or implantation of a ventricular assist device. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 1798 patients, of whom 1050 were included in the long-term survival trial; the median duration of follow-up for the 1050 patients was 7.7 years (interquartile range, 3.9 to 12.8), and the median duration of follow-up for those who survived was 13.9 years (interquartile range, 12.8 to 15.7). Death occurred in 405 of 530 patients (76.4%) assigned to the ICD group and in 370 of 520 patients (71.2%) assigned to the CRT-D group. The time until death appeared to be longer for those assigned to receive a CRT-D than for those assigned to receive an ICD (acceleration factor, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.92; P = 0.002). A secondary-outcome event occurred in 412 patients (77.7%) in the ICD group and in 392 (75.4%) in the CRT-D group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with a reduced ejection fraction, a widened QRS complex, and NYHA class II or III heart failure, the survival benefit associated with receipt of a CRT-D as compared with ICD appeared to be sustained during a median of nearly 14 years of follow-up. (RAFT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00251251.).

Resource use and cost associated with computerized decision support system and usual care in managing patients with atrial fibrillation: analysis of IMPACT-AF randomized trial data.

BACKGROUND: IMPACT-AF is a prospective, randomized, cluster design trial comparing atrial fibrillation (AF) management with a computerized decision support system (CDS) to usual care (control) in the primary care setting of Nova Scotia, Canada. The objective of this analysis was to compare the resource use and costs between CDS and usual care groups. METHODS: Case costing data, 12-month self-administered questionnaires, and monthly diaries from IMPACT-AF were used in this analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to compare costs and resource use between groups. All costs are presented in 2021 Canadian dollars and cover the 12-month period of participation in the study. RESULTS: A total of 1,145 patients enrolled in the trial. Case costing data were available for 466 participants (41.1%), 12-month self-administered questionnaire data for 635 participants (56.0%) and monthly diary data for 223 participants (19.7%). Emergency department visits and hospitalizations comprised the most expensive component of AF care. Across all three datasets, there were no statistically significant differences in costs or resource use between CDS and usual care groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although there were no significant differences in resource use or costs among CDS and usual care groups in the IMPACT-AF trial, this study provides insight into the methodology and practical challenges of collecting economic data alongside a trial. REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (registration number: NCT01927367, date of registration: 2013-08-20).

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure.

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

Health Security Perceptions: Initial Psychometric Analysis of the Construct of Health Security in Chronic Illness Among Patients With a Cardiac Device.

Scale measuring the construct of "health security in chronic illness" (HSCI) was piloted in Canadian cardiac device patients (N = 176) enrolled in a remote-monitoring study at 2 timepoints. Analysis revealed a 2-factor solution, labeled as "support" and "certainty". Patients reported receiving less support over time, but consistent health certainty. Patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators felt less secure over time and reported lower levels of health security in chronic illness than pacemaker patients.

Une échelle mesurant le concept de la « sécurité en matière de santé en présence d'une maladie chronique ¼ a fait l'objet d'un projet pilote auprès de patients canadiens porteurs de dispositifs cardiaques (N = 176) inscrits dans une étude de télésurveillance comportant deux évaluations. L'analyse a révélé une solution à deux facteurs, soit le soutien et la certitude. Les patients ont déclaré qu'ils recevaient moins de soutien au fil du temps, mais que la certitude quant à leur santé était constante. Les porteurs d'un défibrillateur cardioverteur implantable se sentaient moins en sécurité au fil du temps et signalaient de plus bas niveaux de sécurité en matière de santé, relativement à leur maladie chronique, que les porteurs d'un stimulateur cardiaque.

Paced P-wave morphology templates to guide atrial tachycardia localization: A derivation and validation study.

BACKGROUND: Surface ECG is a useful tool to guide mapping of focal atrial tachycardia (AT). OBJECTIVES: We aimed to construct 12-lead ECG templates for P-wave morphology (PWM) during endocardial pacing from different sites in both atria in patients with no apparent structural heart disease (derivation cohort), with the goal of creating a localization algorithm, which could subsequently be validated in a cohort of patients undergoing catheter ablation of focal AT (validation cohort). METHODS: We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients who underwent electrophysiology study, had no structural heart disease and no atrial enlargement. Atrial pacing, at twice diastolic threshold, was carried out at different anatomical sites in both atria. Paced PWM and duration were assessed. An algorithm was generated from the constructed templates of each pacing site. The algorithm was applied on a retrospective series of successfully ablated AT patients. Overall and site-specific accuracy were determined. RESULTS: Derivation cohort included 65 patients (25 men, age 37 ± 13 years). Atrial pacing was performed in 1025 sites in 61 patients (95%) in RA and in 15 patients (23%) in LA. The validation cohort included 71 patients (28 men, age 52 ± 19 years). AT were right atrial in 66.2%. The algorithm successfully predicted AT origin in 91.5% of patients (100% in LA and 87.2% in RA). It was off by one adjacent segment in the remaining 8.5%. CONCLUSIONS: A simple ECG algorithm based on paced PWM templates was highly accurate in localizing site of origin of focal AT in patients with structurally normal hearts.

Disparities in Referral and Utilization of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators for Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We investigated sex disparities in a contemporary Canadian population for utilization of primary prevention ICDs. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study on patients with reduced LVEF admitted to hospitals from 2010 to 2020 in Nova Scotia (population = 971,935). RESULTS: There were 4406 patients eligible for ICDs: 3108 (71%) men and 1298 (29%) women. The mean follow-up time was 3.9 ± 3.0 years. Rates of coronary disease were similar between men and women (45.8% vs 44.0%; P = 0.28), but men had lower LVEF (26.6 ± 5.9% vs 27.2 ± 5.8%; P = 0.0017). The referral rate for ICD was 11% (n = 487), with 13% of men (n = 403) and 6.5% of women (n = 84) referred (P < 0.001). The ICD implantation rate in the population was 8% (n = 358), with 9.5% of men (n = 296) and 4.8% of women (n = 62) (P < 0.001) receiving the device. Men were more likely than women to receive an ICD (odds ratio 2.08, 95% confidence interval 1.61-2.70; P < 0.0001)). There was no significant difference in mortality between men and women (P = 0.2764). There was no significant difference in device therapies between men and women (43.8% vs 31.1%; P = 0.0685). CONCLUSIONS: A significant disparity exists in the utilization of primary prevention ICDs between men and women in a contemporary Canadian population.

Prevalence and management of electrical lead abnormalities in cardiac implantable electronic device leads.

Background: Electrical lead abnormalities (ELAs) can result in device malfunction, leading to significant morbidity in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Objective: We sought to determine the prevalence and management of ELAs in patients with CIEDs. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients implanted with a CIED between 2012 and 2019 at a tertiary care center. The primary outcome was ELA defined as increased capture threshold (≥2× implantation value), decreased sensing (≤0.5 implantation value), change in impedance (>50% over 3 months), or nonphysiologic potentials. A secondary outcome of device clinic utilization was also collected. Results: There were 2996 unique patients (35% female) included with 4600 leads (57% Abbott, 43% Medtronic). ELAs were observed in 135 (3%) leads, including 124 (92%) Abbott and 10 (7%) Medtronic leads (hazard ratio 9.25, P < .001). Mean follow-up was 4.5 ± 2.2 years. ELAs were associated smaller lead French size, atrial location, and Abbott leads. Lead revision was required in 28% of cases. Patients with lead abnormalities had 38% more in-clinic visits per patient year of follow-up compared with those without (P < .001). Conclusion: ELAs were more frequent in certain models, which increased rates of revision and follow-up. Identification of factors that mitigate these abnormalities to improve lead performance are required to improve care for these devices and provide efficient healthcare.

Ventricular Tachycardia and ICD Therapy Burden With Catheter Ablation Versus Escalated Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation improves ventricular tachycardia (VT) event-free (time to event) survival in patients with antiarrhythmic drug (AAD)-refractory VT and previous myocardial infarction (MI). The effects of ablation on recurrent VT and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy (burden) have yet to be investigated. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the VT and ICD therapy burden following treatment with either ablation or escalated AAD therapy among patients with VT and previous MI in the VANISH (Ventricular tachycardia AblatioN versus escalated antiarrhythmic drug therapy in ISchemic Heart disease) trial. METHODS: The VANISH trial randomized patients with previous MI and VT despite initial AAD therapy to either escalated AAD treatment or catheter ablation. VT burden was defined as the total number of VT events treated with ≥1 appropriate ICD therapy. Appropriate ICD therapy burden was defined as the total number of appropriate shocks or antitachycardia pacing therapies (ATPs) delivered. The Anderson-Gill recurrent event model was used to compare burden between the treatment arms. RESULTS: Of the 259 enrolled patients (median age, 69.8 years; 7.0% women), 132 patients were randomized to ablation and 129 patients were randomized to escalated AAD therapy. Over 23.4 months of follow-up, ablation-treated patients had a 40% lower shock-treated VT event burden and a 39% lower appropriate shock burden compared with patients who received escalated AAD therapy (P <0.05 for all). A reduction in VT burden, ATP-treated VT event burden, and appropriate ATP burden among ablation patients was only demonstrated in the stratum of patients with amiodarone-refractory VT (P <0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with AAD-refractory VT and a previous MI, catheter ablation reduced shock-treated VT event burden and appropriate shock burden compared with escalated AAD therapy. There was also lower VT burden, ATP-treated VT event burden, and appropriate ATP burden among ablation-treated patients; however, the effect was limited to patients with amiodarone-refractory VT.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure.

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

Association of the Timing and Extent of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections With Mortality.

Importance: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is a potentially devastating complication with an estimated 12-month mortality of 15% to 30%. The association of the extent (localized or systemic) and timing of infection with all-cause mortality has not been established. Objective: To evaluate the association of the extent and timing of CIED infection with all-cause mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective observational cohort study was conducted between December 1, 2012, and September 30, 2016, in 28 centers across Canada and the Netherlands. The study included 19 559 patients undergoing CIED procedures, 177 of whom developed an infection. Data were analyzed from April 5, 2021, to January 14, 2023. Exposures: Prospectively identified CIED infections. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time-dependent analysis of the timing (early [≤3 months] or delayed [3-12 months]) and extent (localized or systemic) of infection was performed to determine the risk of all-cause mortality associated with CIED infections. Results: Of 19 559 patients undergoing CIED procedures, 177 developed a CIED infection. The mean (SD) age was 68.7 (12.7) years, and 132 patients were male (74.6%). The cumulative incidence of infection was 0.6%, 0.7%, and 0.9% within 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Infection rates were highest in the first 3 months (0.21% per month), reducing significantly thereafter. Compared with patients who did not develop CIED infection, those with early localized infections were not at higher risk for all-cause mortality (no deaths at 30 days [0 of 74 patients]: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.20-1.98]; P = .43). However, patients with early systemic and delayed localized infections had an approximately 3-fold increase in mortality (8.9% 30-day mortality [4 of 45 patients]: aHR, 2.88 [95% CI, 1.48-5.61]; P = .002; 8.8% 30-day mortality [3 of 34 patients]: aHR, 3.57 [95% CI, 1.33-9.57]; P = .01), increasing to a 9.3-fold risk of death for those with delayed systemic infections (21.7% 30-day mortality [5 of 23 patients]: aHR, 9.30 [95% CI, 3.82-22.65]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings suggest that CIED infections are most common within 3 months after the procedure. Early systemic infections and delayed localized infections are associated with increased mortality, with the highest risk for patients with delayed systemic infections. Early detection and treatment of CIED infections may be important in reducing mortality associated with this complication.

Standard vs Augmented Ablation of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence: The AWARE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly occurs after catheter ablation and is associated with patient morbidity and health care costs. Objective: To evaluate the superiority of an augmented double wide-area circumferential ablation (WACA) compared with a standard single WACA in preventing recurrent atrial arrhythmias (AA) (atrial tachycardia, atrial flutter, or atrial fibrillation [AF]) in patients with paroxysmal AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a pragmatic, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open, blinded end point superiority clinical trial conducted at 10 university-affiliated centers in Canada. The trial enrolled patients 18 years and older with symptomatic paroxysmal AF from March 2015 to May 2017. Analysis took place between January and April 2022. Analyses were intention to treat. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive radiofrequency catheter ablation for pulmonary vein isolation with either a standard single WACA or an augmented double WACA. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was AA recurrence between 91 and 365 days postablation. Patients underwent 42 days of ambulatory electrocardiography monitoring after ablation. Secondary outcomes included need for repeated catheter ablation and procedural and safety variables. Results: Of 398 patients, 195 were randomized to the single WACA (control) arm (mean [SD] age, 60.6 [9.3] years; 65 [33.3%] female) and 203 to the double WACA (experimental) arm (mean [SD] age, 61.5 [9.3] years; 66 [32.5%] female). Overall, 52 patients (26.7%) in the single WACA arm and 50 patients (24.6%) in the double WACA arm had recurrent AA at 1 year (relative risk, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.66-1.29; P = .64). Twenty patients (10.3%) in the single WACA arm and 15 patients (7.4%) in the double WACA arm underwent repeated catheter ablation (relative risk, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.38-1.36). Adjudicated serious adverse events occurred in 13 patients (6.7%) in the single WACA arm and 14 patients (6.9%) in the double WACA arm. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of patients with paroxysmal AF, additional ablation by performing a double ablation lesion set did not result in improved freedom from recurrent AA compared with a standard single ablation set. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02150902.