Pulsed Field or Conventional Thermal Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Catheter-based pulmonary vein isolation is an effective treatment for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Pulsed field ablation, which delivers microsecond high-voltage electrical fields, may limit damage to tissues outside the myocardium. The efficacy and safety of pulsed field ablation as compared with conventional thermal ablation are not known. METHODS: In this randomized, single-blind, noninferiority trial, we assigned patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in a 1:1 ratio to undergo pulsed field ablation or conventional radiofrequency or cryoballoon ablation. The primary efficacy end point was freedom from a composite of initial procedural failure, documented atrial tachyarrhythmia after a 3-month blanking period, antiarrhythmic drug use, cardioversion, or repeat ablation. The primary safety end point included acute and chronic device- and procedure-related serious adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 305 patients were assigned to undergo pulsed field ablation, and 302 were assigned to undergo thermal ablation. At 1 year, the primary efficacy end point was met (i.e., no events occurred) in 204 patients (estimated probability, 73.3%) who underwent pulsed field ablation and 194 patients (estimated probability, 71.3%) who underwent thermal ablation (between-group difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% Bayesian credible interval, -5.2 to 9.2; posterior probability of noninferiority, >0.999). Primary safety end-point events occurred in 6 patients (estimated incidence, 2.1%) who underwent pulsed field ablation and 4 patients (estimated incidence, 1.5%) who underwent thermal ablation (between-group difference, 0.6 percentage points; 95% Bayesian credible interval, -1.5 to 2.8; posterior probability of noninferiority, >0.999). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation receiving a catheter-based therapy, pulsed field ablation was noninferior to conventional thermal ablation with respect to freedom from a composite of initial procedural failure, documented atrial tachyarrhythmia after a 3-month blanking period, antiarrhythmic drug use, cardioversion, or repeat ablation and with respect to device- and procedure-related serious adverse events at 1 year. (Funded by Farapulse-Boston Scientific; ADVENT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04612244.).

Catheter Ablation in End-Stage Heart Failure with Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The role of catheter ablation in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation and end-stage heart failure is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, open-label trial in Germany that involved patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation and end-stage heart failure who were referred for heart transplantation evaluation. Patients were assigned to receive catheter ablation and guideline-directed medical therapy or medical therapy alone. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause, implantation of a left ventricular assist device, or urgent heart transplantation. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients were assigned to the ablation group and 97 to the medical-therapy group. The trial was stopped for efficacy by the data and safety monitoring board 1 year after randomization was completed. Catheter ablation was performed in 81 of 97 patients (84%) in the ablation group and in 16 of 97 patients (16%) in the medical-therapy group. After a median follow-up of 18.0 months (interquartile range, 14.6 to 22.6), a primary end-point event had occurred in 8 patients (8%) in the ablation group and in 29 patients (30%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11 to 0.52; P<0.001). Death from any cause occurred in 6 patients (6%) in the ablation group and in 19 patients (20%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.72). Procedure-related complications occurred in 3 patients in the ablation group and in 1 patient in the medical-therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atrial fibrillation and end-stage heart failure, the combination of catheter ablation and guideline-directed medical therapy was associated with a lower likelihood of a composite of death from any cause, implantation of a left ventricular assist device, or urgent heart transplantation than medical therapy alone. (Funded by Else Kröner-Fresenius-Stiftung; CASTLE-HTx ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04649801.).

In symptomatic AF, catheter ablation vs. medical therapy reduced depression and anxiety symptoms at 12 mo.

SOURCE CITATION: Al-Kaisey AM, Parameswaran R, Bryant C, et al. Atrial fibrillation catheter ablation vs medical therapy and psychological distress: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2023;330:925-933. 37698564.

Atrial fibrillation progression after cryoablation vs. radiofrequency ablation: the CIRCA-DOSE trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a chronic progressive disorder. Persistent forms of AF are associated with increased rates of thromboembolism, heart failure, and death. Catheter ablation modifies the pathogenic mechanism of AF progression. No randomized studies have evaluated the impact of the ablation energy on progression to persistent atrial tachyarrhythmia. METHODS: Three hundred forty-six patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal AF were enrolled and randomly assigned to contact-force-guided RF ablation (CF-RF ablation, 115), 4 min cryoballoon ablation (CRYO-4, 115), or 2 min cryoballoon ablation (CRYO-2, 116). Implantable cardiac monitors placed at study entry were used for follow-up. The main outcome was the first episode of persistent atrial tachyarrhythmia. Secondary outcomes included atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence and arrhythmia burden on the implantable monitor. RESULTS: At a median of 944.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 612.5-1104) days, 0 of 115 patients (0.0%) randomly assigned to CF-RF, 8 of 115 patients (7.0%) assigned to CRYO-4, and 5 of 116 patients (4.3%) assigned to CRYO-2 experienced an episode of persistent atrial tachyarrhythmia (P = .03). A documented recurrence of any atrial tachyarrhythmia ≥30 s occurred in 56.5%, 53.9%, and 62.9% of those randomized to CF-RF, CRYO-4, and CRYO-2, respectively; P = .65. Compared with that of the pre-ablation monitoring period, AF burden was reduced by a median of 99.5% (IQR 94.0%, 100.0%) with CF-RF, 99.9% (IQR 93.3%-100.0%) with CRYO-4, and 99.1%% (IQR 87.0%-100.0%) with CRYO-2 (P = .38). CONCLUSIONS: Catheter ablation of paroxysmal AF using radiofrequency energy was associated with fewer patients developing persistent AF on follow-up.

Residual leaks following percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion and outcomes: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Residual leaks are not infrequent after left atrial appendage occlusion. However, there is still uncertainty regarding their prognostic implications. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of residual leaks after left atrial appendage occlusion. METHODS: A literature search was conducted until 19 February 2023. Residual leaks comprised peri-device leaks (PDLs) on transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) or computed tomography (CT), as well as left atrial appendage patency on CT. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to assess the clinical impact of residual leaks. RESULTS: Overall 48 eligible studies (44 non-randomized/observational and 4 randomized studies) including 61 666 patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent left atrial appendage occlusion were analysed. Peri-device leak by TEE was present in 26.1% of patients. Computed tomography-based left atrial appendage patency and PDL were present in 54.9% and 57.3% of patients, respectively. Transoesophageal echocardiography-based PDL (i.e. any reported PDL regardless of its size) was significantly associated with a higher risk of thromboembolism [pooled odds ratio (pOR) 2.04, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.52-2.74], all-cause mortality (pOR 1.16, 95% CI: 1.08-1.24), and major bleeding (pOR 1.12, 95% CI: 1.03-1.22), compared with no reported PDL. A positive graded association between PDL size and risk of thromboembolism was noted across TEE cut-offs. For any PDL of >0, >1, >3, and >5 mm, the pORs for thromboembolism were 1.82 (95% CI: 1.35-2.47), 2.13 (95% CI: 1.04-4.35), 4.14 (95% CI: 2.07-8.27), and 4.44 (95% CI: 2.09-9.43), respectively, compared with either no PDL or PDL smaller than each cut-off. Neither left atrial appendage patency, nor PDL by CT was associated with thromboembolism (pOR 1.45 and 1.04, 95% CI: 0.84-2.50 and 0.52-2.07, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Peri-device leak detected by TEE was associated with adverse events, primarily thromboembolism. Residual leaks detected by CT were more frequent but lacked prognostic significance.

Mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair vs. isolated mitral surgery for severe mitral regurgitation: a French nationwide study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Mitral valve surgery and, more recently, mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) are the two treatments of severe mitral regurgitation in eligible patients. Clinical comparison of both therapies remains limited by the number of patients analysed. The objective of this study was to analyse the outcomes of mitral TEER vs. isolated mitral valve surgery at a nationwide level in France. METHODS: Based on the French administrative hospital discharge database, the study collected information for all consecutive patients treated for mitral regurgitation with isolated TEER or isolated mitral valve surgery between 2012 and 2022. Propensity score matching was used for the analysis of outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 57 030 patients were found in the database. After matching on baseline characteristics, 2160 patients were analysed in each arm. At 3-year follow-up, TEER was associated with significantly lower incidence of cardiovascular death (hazard ratio 0.685, 95% confidence interval 0.563-0.832; P = .0001), pacemaker implantation, and stroke. Non-cardiovascular death (hazard ratio 1.562, 95% confidence interval 1.238-1.971; P = .0002), recurrent pulmonary oedema, and cardiac arrest were more frequent after TEER. No significant differences between the two groups were observed regarding all-cause death (hazard ratio 0.967, 95% confidence interval 0.835-1.118; P = .65), endocarditis, major bleeding, atrial fibrillation, and myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that TEER for severe mitral regurgitation was associated with lower cardiovascular mortality than mitral surgery at long-term follow-up. Pacemaker implantation and stroke were less frequently observed after TEER.

Oral anticoagulation after atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: benefits and risks.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Few recent large-scale studies have evaluated the risks and benefits of continuing oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy after catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF). This study evaluated the status of continuation of OAC therapy and the association between continuation of OAC therapy and thromboembolic and bleeding events according to the CHADS2 score. METHODS: This retrospective study included data from the Japanese nationwide administrative claims database of patients who underwent CA for AF between April 2014 and March 2021. Patients without AF recurrence assessed by administrative data of the treatment modalities were divided into two groups according to continuation of OAC therapy 6 months after the index CA. The primary outcomes were thromboembolism and major bleeding after a landmark period of 6 months. After inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis, the association between OAC continuation and outcomes was determined according to the CHADS2 score. RESULTS: Among 231 374 patients included, 69.7%, 21.6%, and 8.7% had CHADS2 scores of ≤1, 2, and ≥3, respectively. Of these, 71% continued OAC therapy at 6 months. The OAC continuation rate was higher in the high CHADS2 score group than that in the low CHADS2 score group. Among all patients, 2451 patients (0.55 per 100 person-years) had thromboembolism and 2367 (0.53 per 100 person-years) had major bleeding. In the CHADS2 score ≤1 group, the hazard ratio of the continued OAC group was 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-1.01, P = .06] for thromboembolism and was 1.51 (95% CI: 1.27-1.80, P < .001) for major bleeding. In the CHADS2 score ≥3 group, the hazard ratio of the continued OAC group was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.46-0.82, P = .001) for thromboembolism and was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.71-1.56, P = 0.81) for major bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: This observational study suggests that the benefits and risks of continuing OAC therapy after CA for AF differ based on the patient's CHADS2 score. The risk of major bleeding due to OAC continuation seems to outweigh the risk reduction of thromboembolism in patients with lower thromboembolic risk.

The spiral wave frequency effect in atrial fibrillation.

A spiral wavefront (WF), generated by a cardiac rotor that drifts between surface electrodes during atrial fibrillation, exhibits frequency changes inconsistent with classical Doppler effect (CDE) phenomena. Recent clinical studies reveal three repeatedly observed events--1) side-dependent frequency changes across the path of the rotor, 2) one additional WF strike on the higher frequency side, and 3) a reversal of WF strike sequence--which constitute a diametrical property of spinning WF sources. A linear ray model is first used to reveal and develop the diametrical phenomena. Mathematical models of an Archimedean spiral and a spiral generated by the diffusion equation are developed and compared. Each formulation predicts the diametrical property that CDE does not capture and illuminates the occurrence of a strong side and weak side with respect to the rotor path. Whereas CDE exhibits higher and lower frequencies from approaching and receding sources of WFs, respectively, spiral rotors generate higher and lower frequencies on opposite sides of the migration path. This motivates the reconsideration of mapping and ablation strategies that have traditionally been based on identifying sites of the dominant frequency. While this research aims to characterize the path of a spiral rotor during atrial fibrillation accurately, the results are applicable in other fields of science and engineering in which rotating spiral waves occur.

Pulsed Field Ablation for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: PULSED AF Pivotal Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pulsed field ablation uses electrical pulses to cause nonthermal irreversible electroporation and induce cardiac cell death. Pulsed field ablation may have effectiveness comparable to traditional catheter ablation while preventing thermally mediated complications. METHODS: The PULSED AF pivotal study (Pulsed Field Ablation to Irreversibly Electroporate Tissue and Treat AF) was a prospective, global, multicenter, nonrandomized, paired single-arm study in which patients with paroxysmal (n=150) or persistent (n=150) symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) refractory to class I or III antiarrhythmic drugs were treated with pulsed field ablation. All patients were monitored for 1 year using weekly and symptomatic transtelephonic monitoring; 3-, 6-, and 12-month ECGs; and 6- and 12-month 24-hour Holter monitoring. The primary effectiveness end point was freedom from a composite of acute procedural failure, arrhythmia recurrence, or antiarrhythmic escalation through 12 months, excluding a 3-month blanking period to allow recovery from the procedure. The primary safety end point was freedom from a composite of serious procedure- and device-related adverse events. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to evaluate the primary end points. RESULTS: Pulsed field ablation was shown to be effective at 1 year in 66.2% (95% CI, 57.9 to 73.2) of patients with paroxysmal AF and 55.1% (95% CI, 46.7 to 62.7) of patients with persistent AF. The primary safety end point occurred in 1 patient (0.7%; 95% CI, 0.1 to 4.6) in both the paroxysmal and persistent AF cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: PULSED AF demonstrated a low rate of primary safety adverse events (0.7%) and provided effectiveness consistent with established ablation technologies using a novel irreversible electroporation energy to treat patients with AF. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04198701.

Safety and Effectiveness of Pulsed Field Ablation to Treat Atrial Fibrillation: One-Year Outcomes From the MANIFEST-PF Registry.

BACKGROUND: Pulsed field ablation is a novel nonthermal cardiac ablation modality using ultra-rapid electrical pulses to cause cell death by a mechanism of irreversible electroporation. Unlike the traditional ablation energy sources, pulsed field ablation has demonstrated significant preferentiality to myocardial tissue ablation, and thus avoids certain thermally mediated complications. However, its safety and effectiveness remain unknown in usual clinical care. METHODS: MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-Approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) is a retrospective, multinational, patient-level registry wherein patients at each center were prospectively included in their respective center registries. The registry included all patients undergoing postapproval treatment with a multielectrode 5-spline pulsed field ablation catheter to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) between March 1, 2021, and May 30, 2022. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinical documented atrial arrhythmia (AF/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia) of ≥30 seconds on the basis of electrocardiographic data after a 3-month blanking period (on or off antiarrhythmic drugs). Safety outcomes included the composite of acute (<7 days postprocedure) and latent (>7 days) major adverse events. RESULTS: At 24 European centers (77 operators) pulsed field ablation was performed in 1568 patients with AF: age 64.5±11.5 years, female 35%, paroxysmal/persistent AF 65%/32%, CHA2DS2-VASc 2.2±1.6, median left ventricular ejection fraction 60%, and left atrial diameter 42 mm. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 99.2% of patients. After a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 367 (289-421) days, the 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was 78.1% (95% CI, 76.0%-80.0%); clinical effectiveness was more common in patients with paroxysmal AF versus persistent AF (81.6% versus 71.5%; P=0.001). Acute major adverse events occurred in 1.9% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this large observational registry of the postapproval clinical use of pulsed field technology to treat AF, catheter ablation using pulsed field energy was clinically effective in 78% of patients with AF.

Treatment-related cardiovascular events in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: Evidence from real-world data with a competing risks approach.

BACKGROUND: Understanding cancer treatment-related cardiovascular (CV) events is important for cancer care; however, comprehensive evaluation of CV events in patients with lung cancer is limited. This study aimed to assess the cumulative incidence and associated risks of various CV event types in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: A total of 7868 individuals aged 40 years and older, recently diagnosed with NSCLC (2007-2018), were assessed with data obtained from the National Cancer Center, Korea. This study included nine types of CV events. A 2-year cumulative incidence function (CIF) of CV events was estimated, with death as a competing event. The associated risks were assessed by subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) in the Fine-Gray competing risks model. RESULTS: CV events were observed in 7.8% of patients with NSCLC, with the most frequently observed types being atrial fibrillation and flutter (AF) (2.7%), venous thromboembolic disease (2.0%), and cerebrovascular disease (CeVD) (1.5%). Overall, all CV events were highest in the group treated with systemic therapy (CIF, 10.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.5%-11.8%), followed by those treated with surgery (CIF, 10.0%; 95% CI, 8.6%-11.6%); the incidence of AF (CIF, 5.7%; 95% CI, 4.6%-7.0%) was highest in patients treated with surgery. Individuals treated with systemic therapy were found to exhibit a higher CeVD risk than those treated with surgery (sHR, 4.12; 95% CI, 1.66-10.23). Among the patients who underwent surgery, those with lobectomy and pneumonectomy had a higher AF risk (vs. wedge resection/segmentectomy; sHR, 7.79; 95% CI, 1.87-32.42; sHR, 8.10; 95% CI, 1.60-40.89). CONCLUSIONS: These findings revealed treatment-related CV event risks in patients with NSCLC, which suggests that the risk of AF in surgery and CeVD in systemic therapy should be paid more attention to achieve a better prognosis and improve cancer survivorship outcomes. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Atrial fibrillation and flutter (AF) is the most common cardiovascular event, particularly at a high risk in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing surgery. Patients receiving surgery with poor performance status, diagnosed with regional stage, and undergoing lobectomy or pneumonectomy are at a high risk of AF. Systemic/radiotherapy is associated with cerebrovascular and ischemic heart disease in patients with NSCLC.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion during Cardiac Surgery to Prevent Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Surgical occlusion of the left atrial appendage has been hypothesized to prevent ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation, but this has not been proved. The procedure can be performed during cardiac surgery undertaken for other reasons. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial involving participants with atrial fibrillation and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2 (on a scale from 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating greater risk of stroke) who were scheduled to undergo cardiac surgery for another indication. The participants were randomly assigned to undergo or not undergo occlusion of the left atrial appendage during surgery; all the participants were expected to receive usual care, including oral anticoagulation, during follow-up. The primary outcome was the occurrence of ischemic stroke (including transient ischemic attack with positive neuroimaging) or systemic embolism. The participants, research personnel, and primary care physicians (other than the surgeons) were unaware of the trial-group assignments. RESULTS: The primary analysis population included 2379 participants in the occlusion group and 2391 in the no-occlusion group, with a mean age of 71 years and a mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 4.2. The participants were followed for a mean of 3.8 years. A total of 92.1% of the participants received the assigned procedure, and at 3 years, 76.8% of the participants continued to receive oral anticoagulation. Stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 114 participants (4.8%) in the occlusion group and in 168 (7.0%) in the no-occlusion group (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 0.85; P = 0.001). The incidence of perioperative bleeding, heart failure, or death did not differ significantly between the trial groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among participants with atrial fibrillation who had undergone cardiac surgery, most of whom continued to receive ongoing antithrombotic therapy, the risk of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was lower with concomitant left atrial appendage occlusion performed during the surgery than without it. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; LAAOS III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01561651.).

Cryoballoon Ablation as Initial Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: In patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation that has not responded to medication, catheter ablation is more effective than antiarrhythmic drug therapy for maintaining sinus rhythm. However, the safety and efficacy of cryoballoon ablation as initial first-line therapy have not been established. METHODS: We performed a multicenter trial in which patients 18 to 80 years of age who had paroxysmal atrial fibrillation for which they had not previously received rhythm-control therapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs (class I or III agents) or pulmonary vein isolation with a cryoballoon. Arrhythmia monitoring included 12-lead electrocardiography conducted at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months; patient-activated telephone monitoring conducted weekly and when symptoms were present during months 3 through 12; and 24-hour ambulatory monitoring conducted at 6 and 12 months. The primary efficacy end point was treatment success (defined as freedom from initial failure of the procedure or atrial arrhythmia recurrence after a 90-day blanking period to allow recovery from the procedure or drug dose adjustment, evaluated in a Kaplan-Meier analysis). The primary safety end point was assessed in the ablation group only and was a composite of several procedure-related and cryoballoon system-related serious adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 203 participants who underwent randomization and received treatment, 104 underwent ablation, and 99 initially received drug therapy. In the ablation group, initial success of the procedure was achieved in 97% of patients. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of patients with treatment success at 12 months was 74.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.0 to 82.0) in the ablation group and 45.0% (95% CI, 34.6 to 54.7) in the drug-therapy group (P<0.001 by log-rank test). Two primary safety end-point events occurred in the ablation group (Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of patients with an event within 12 months, 1.9%; 95% CI, 0.5 to 7.5). CONCLUSIONS: Cryoballoon ablation as initial therapy was superior to drug therapy for the prevention of atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Serious procedure-related adverse events were uncommon. (Supported by Medtronic; STOP AF First ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03118518.).

Cryoablation or Drug Therapy for Initial Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend a trial of one or more antiarrhythmic drugs before catheter ablation is considered in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, first-line ablation may be more effective in maintaining sinus rhythm. METHODS: We randomly assigned 303 patients with symptomatic, paroxysmal, untreated atrial fibrillation to undergo catheter ablation with a cryothermy balloon or to receive antiarrhythmic drug therapy for initial rhythm control. All the patients received an implantable cardiac monitoring device to detect atrial tachyarrhythmia. The follow-up period was 12 months. The primary end point was the first documented recurrence of any atrial tachyarrhythmia (atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia) between 91 and 365 days after catheter ablation or the initiation of an antiarrhythmic drug. The secondary end points included freedom from symptomatic arrhythmia, the atrial fibrillation burden, and quality of life. RESULTS: At 1 year, a recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia had occurred in 66 of 154 patients (42.9%) assigned to undergo ablation and in 101 of 149 patients (67.8%) assigned to receive antiarrhythmic drugs (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.66; P<0.001). Symptomatic atrial tachyarrhythmia had recurred in 11.0% of the patients who underwent ablation and in 26.2% of those who received antiarrhythmic drugs (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.68). The median percentage of time in atrial fibrillation was 0% (interquartile range, 0 to 0.08) with ablation and 0.13% (interquartile range, 0 to 1.60) with antiarrhythmic drugs. Serious adverse events occurred in 5 patients (3.2%) who underwent ablation and in 6 patients (4.0%) who received antiarrhythmic drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients receiving initial treatment for symptomatic, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, there was a significantly lower rate of atrial fibrillation recurrence with catheter cryoballoon ablation than with antiarrhythmic drug therapy, as assessed by continuous cardiac rhythm monitoring. (Funded by the Cardiac Arrhythmia Network of Canada and others; EARLY-AF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02825979.).

Feasibility of double-blinded, placebo-controlled interventional study for assessing catheter ablation efficacy in persistent atrial fibrillation: Insights from the ORBITA AF feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: To date, there are no randomized, double-blinded clinical trials comparing catheter ablation to DC cardioversion (DCCV) with medical therapy in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF). Conducting a large-scale trial to address this question presents considerable challenges, including recruitment, blinding, and implementation. We conducted a pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a definitive placebo-controlled trial. METHODS: This prospective trial was carried out at Barts Heart Centre, United Kingdom, employing a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled design. Twenty patients with PersAF (duration <2 years) were recruited, representing 10% of the proposed larger trial as determined by a power calculation. The patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either PVI ± DCCV (PVI group) or DCCV + Placebo (DCCV group). The primary endpoint of this feasibility study was to evaluate patient blinding. Patients remained unaware of their treatment allocation until end of study. RESULTS: During the study, 35% of patients experienced recurrence of PersAF prior to completion of 12 months follow-up. Blinding was successfully maintained amongst both patients and medical staff. The DCCV group had a trend to higher recurrence and repeat procedure rate compared to the PVI group (recurrence of PersAF 60% vs 30%; p = .07 and repeat procedure 70% vs 40%; p = .4). The quality of life experienced by individuals in the PVI group showed improvement, as evidenced by enhanced scores on the AF specific questionnaire (AF PROMS) (3 [±4] vs 21 [±8]) and SF-12 mental-component raw score (51.4 [±7] vs 43.24 [±15]) in patients who maintained sinus rhythm at 12 months. CONCLUSION: This feasibility study establishes the potential for conducting a blinded, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of PVI versus DCCV in patients with PersAF.

Regional differences in outcomes with ablation versus drug therapy for atrial fibrillation: Results from the CABANA trial.

BACKGROUND: The finding of unexpected variations in treatment benefits by geographic region in international clinical trials raises complex questions about the interpretation and generalizability of trial findings. We observed such geographical variations in outcome and in the effectiveness of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation versus drug therapy in the Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation (CABANA) trial. This paper describes these differences and investigates potential causes. METHODS: The examination of treatment effects by geographic region was a prespecified analysis. CABANA enrolled patients from 10 countries, with 1,285 patients at 85 North American (NA) sites and 919 at 41 non-NA sites. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Death and first atrial fibrillation recurrence were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: At least 1 primary endpoint event occurred in 157 patients (12.2%) from NA and 33 (3.6%) from non-NA sites over a median 54.9 and 40.5 months of follow-up, respectively (NA/non-NA adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48-3.21, P < .001). In NA patients, 78 events occurred in the ablation and 79 in the drug arm, (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.66, 1.24) while 11 and 22 events occurred in non-NA patients (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.25,1.05, interaction P = .154). Death occurred in 53 ablation and 51 drug therapy patients in the NA group (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65,1.42) and in 5 ablation and 16 drug therapy patients in the non-NA group (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12,0.86, interaction P = .044). Adjusting for baseline regional differences or prognostic risk variables did not account for the regional differences in treatment effects. Atrial fibrillation recurrence was reduced by ablation in both regions (NA: HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46, 0.63; non-NA: HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30, 0.64, interaction P = .322). CONCLUSIONS: In CABANA, primary outcome events occurred significantly more often in the NA group but assignment to ablation significantly reduced all-cause mortality in the non-NA group only. These differences were not explained by regional variations in procedure effectiveness, safety, or patient characteristics. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0091150; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00911508.

CLOSE protocol versus lower ablation index value for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A randomized noninferior clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The optimized ablation index (AI) value for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) remains to be defined. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of CLOSE protocol and lower AI protocol in paroxysmal AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with symptomatic, drug-resistant paroxysmal AF for first ablation were prospectively enrolled from September 2020 to January 2022. The patients were randomly divided into CLOSE group (AI ≥ 550 for anterior/roof segments and ≥400 for posterior/inferior segments) and lower AI group (AI ≥ 450 for anterior/roof segments and ≥350 for posterior/inferior segments). First-pass isolation, acute pulmonary vein (PV) reconnections, 1-year arrhythmia recurrence, and major complications were assessed. Of the 270 enrolled patients, 238 completed 1-year follow-up (118 in CLOSE group and 120 in lower AI group). First-pass isolation in left PVs was higher in CLOSE group (71.2% vs. 53.3%, p = .005). Acute PV reconnections were comparable between groups (9.3% vs. 14.2%, p = .246). At 1 year, 86.4% in CLOSE group versus 81.7% in lower AI group were free from atrial arrhythmia (log rank p = .334). The proportion difference was -4.8% (95% CI: -14.1% to 4.6%), and p = .475 for noninferiority. Stroke occurred in four patients of lower AI group, and no cardiac tamponade, atrioesophageal fistula, major bleeding or death occurred post procedure. CONCLUSION: For patients with paroxysmal AF and treated by AI-guided PV ablation, lower AI is not noninferior to CLOSE protocol.

Heart failure and atrial fibrillation: Is atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure pointless or mandatory?

A vast amount of now well-established clinical and epidemiological data indicates a close, interdependent, and symbiotic association between atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). Both AF and HF, when co-exist in a patient, have serious treatment and prognostic implications. Based on the prevailing knowledge of the topic, various societies have issued a number of guidelines regarding the management of patients with AF and HF. Overall, it is the rhythm control strategy that has shown beneficial effect over the rate control strategy with improvement in symptoms of AF and HF. While antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) and catheter ablation (CA) may be utilized as rhythm control strategy for AF, both AADs and CA have limitations of their own. Furthermore, with the progress made in various pharmacotherapeutic agents in HF, one could question the utility of CA in HF (i.e., whether ablation is mandatory or pointless in patients who have HF). The purpose of this review is to discuss this very point, focusing on the beneficial, neutral, or detrimental outcome of CA based on the category and class of HF.

Impact of intracardiac echocardiography versus transesophageal echocardiography guidance on left atrial appendage occlusion procedures: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) is increasingly used during left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) as an alternative to transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of ICE versus TEE guidance during LAAO on procedural characteristics and acute outcomes, as well the presence of peri-device leaks and residual septal defects during follow-up. METHODS: All studies comparing ICE-guided versus TEE-guided LAAO were identified. The primary outcomes were procedural efficacy and occurrence of procedure-related complications. Secondary outcomes included lab efficiency (defined as a reduction in in-room time), procedural time, fluoroscopy time, and presence of peri-device leaks and residual interatrial septal defects (IASD) during follow-up. RESULTS: Twelve studies (n = 5637) were included. There were no differences in procedural success (98.3% vs. 97.8%; OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.42-1.27, p = .27; I2 = 0%) or adverse events (4.5% vs. 4.4%; OR 0.81 95% CI 0.56-1.16, p = .25; I2 = 0%) between the ICE-guided and TEE-guided groups. ICE guidance reduced in in-room time (mean-weighted 28.6-min reduction in in-room time) without differences in procedural time or fluoroscopy time. There were no differences in peri-device leak (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.68-1.27, p = 0.64); however, an increased prevalence of residual IASD was observed with ICE-guided versus TEE-guided LAAO (46.3% vs. 34.2%; OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.05-4.75, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: ICE guidance is associated with similar procedural efficacy and safety, but could result in improved lab efficiency (as established by a significant reduction in in-room time). No differences in the rate of periprocedural leaks were found. A higher prevalence of residual interatrial septal defects was observed with ICE guidance.

Initial clinical experience of atrial fibrillation ablation guided by a cryoballoon-compatible, magnetic-based circular catheter.

INTRODUCTION: The circular catheter compatible with current cryoballoon system for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is exclusively sensed by impedance-based electro-anatomical mapping (EAM) system, limiting the accuracy of maps. We aim to investigate the feasibility and safety of a magnetic-based circular mapping catheter for AF ablation with cryoballoon. METHODS: Nineteen consecutive patients who underwent pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with cryoballoon for paroxysmal or persistent AF were included. EAMs of left atrium (LA) created by the LASSOSTAR™NAV catheter (Lassostar map) before and after PVI were compared to that generated by a high-density mapping catheter (Pentaray map) from different aspects including structural similarity, PV angle, LA posterior wall (LAPW) and low voltage areas (LVAs), and the amplitude of far field electrograms (FFEs) recorded by catheters. RESULTS: All patients had successful PVI without major complications. With similar mapping time and density, the LA volume calculated from the Pentaray map and Lassostar map were comparable. There were no significant differences in PV angle of all PVs and PW area (16.8 ± 3.2 vs. 17.1 ± 2.8, p = .516) between Pentaray map and Lassostar map. High structural similarity score was observed between two maps (0.783 in RAO/LAO view and 0.791 in PA view). Lassostar map detected lesser but not statistically significant extension of LVA (13.9% vs. 18.3%, p = .07). Amplitude of FFE was larger at the right superior PV on Lassostar map (0.21 ± 0.16 vs. 0.14 ± 0.11 mV, p = .041) compared to that on the Pentaray map. CONCLUSION: In our initial experience, PVI with cryoballoon and magnetic-based circular LASSOSTAR™NAV catheter was safe and effective based on the accurate LA geometry it created.