Convergence of Epicardial and Endocardial RF Ablation for the Treatment of Symptomatic Persistent AF (CONVERGE Trial): Rationale and design.

Atrial fibrillation is the most common sustained arrhythmia affecting over 33 million people worldwide. Approximately 70% of AF patients have non-paroxysmal AF. As AF progresses from paroxysmal to non-paroxysmal forms, the prevalence of comorbidities increases. The efficacy of catheter ablation for persistent and long standing persistent (LSP) AF is <40%, often requiring multiple ablation procedures with greater cost and potentially more complications. There is an unmet need to effectively treat such patients. METHODS: CONVERGE is an investigational device exempt, prospective, multi-center, open label 2:1 randomized controlled pivotal study to evaluate the overall success of the Convergent hybrid procedure compared to endocardial catheter ablation for the treatment of symptomatic persistent AF refractory or intolerant to at least one Class I and /or III anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD). A total of 153 subjects at 27 centers are treated in the study. The CONVERGE study is differentiated from other studies currently being conducted on the persistent AF population, because a) there is no time restriction on the duration of diagnosed AF in the patients being studied and b) the trial allows patients with left atrial sizes up to 6 centimeters. The ongoing trials are limited to either 6 months, 12 months or 3-years of continuous AF making CONVERGE the only ablation trial thus far to include a substantial portion of patients with longstanding persistent AF. The convergent procedure involves combination of minimally invasive pericardioscopic epicardial ablation with endocardial left atrial ablation. The primary endpoint is freedom from AF/AFL/AF absent class I/III AAD, except for a previously failed class I/ III AAD with no increase in dosage following 3-months through 12-months. The primary safety endpoint is the incidence of major adverse events from the procedure through 30-days post procedure. CONCLUSION: CONVERGE AF compares the overall success of the Convergent hybrid procedure to endocardial catheter ablation for the treatment of persistent and longstanding persistent AF. By providing objective comparative data, the study aims to provide guidance on the treatment of such patients.

Atrial fibrillation symptom reduction and improved quality of life following the hybrid convergent procedure: a CONVERGE trial subanalysis.

Background: CONVERGE was a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial that evaluated the safety of Hybrid Atrial Fibrillation Convergent (HC) and compared its effectiveness to endocardial catheter ablation (CA) for the treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF) and longstanding PersAF (LSPAF). In 2020, we reported that CONVERGE met its primary safety and effectiveness endpoints. The primary objective of the present study is to report CONVERGE trial results for quality of life (QOL) and Class I/III anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) utilization following HC. Methods: Eligible patients had drug-refractory symptomatic PersAF or LSPAF and a left atrium diameter ≤6.0 cm. Enrolled patients were randomized 2:1 to receive HC or CA. Atrial Fibrillation Severity Scale (AFSS) and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were assessed at baseline and 12 months; statistical comparison was performed using paired t-tests. AAD utilization at baseline through 12 and 18 months post-procedure was evaluated; statistical comparison was performed using McNemar's tests. Results: A total of 153 patients were treated with either HC (n=102) or CA (n=51). Of the 102 HC patients, 38 had LSPAF. AFSS and SF-36 Mental and Physical Component scores were significantly improved at 12 months versus baseline with HC overall and for the subset of LSPAF patients treated with either HC or CA. The proportion of HC patients (n=102) who used Class I /III AADs at 12 and 18 months was significantly less (33.3% and 36.3%, respectively) than baseline (84.3%; P<0.001). In LSPAF patients who underwent HC (n=38), AADs use was 29.0% through 18 months follow-up versus 71.1% at baseline (P<0.001). Conclusions: HC reduced AF symptoms, significantly improved QOL, and reduced AAD use in patients with PersAF and LSPAF. ClinicalTrialsgov Identifier: NCT01984346.

Hybrid epicardial-endocardial ablation for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: A subanalysis of the CONVERGE Trial.

Background: Favorable clinical outcomes are difficult to achieve in long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) with catheter ablation (CA). The CONVERGE (Convergence of Epicardial and Endocardial Ablation for the Treatment of Symptomatic Persistent Atrial FIbrillation) trial evaluated the effectiveness of hybrid convergent (HC) ablation vs endocardial CA. Objective: The study sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of HC vs CA in the LSPAF subgroup from the CONVERGE trial. Methods: The CONVERGE trial was a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial that enrolled 153 patients at 27 sites. A post hoc analysis was performed on LSPAF patients. The primary effectiveness was freedom from atrial arrhythmias off new or increased dose of previously failed or intolerant antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) through 12 months. The primary safety endpoint was major adverse event incidence through 30 days with HC. Key secondary effectiveness measures included (1) percent of patients achieving ≥90% AF burden reduction vs baseline and (2) AF freedom. Results: Sixty-five patients (42.5% of total enrollment) had LSPAF; 38 in HC and 27 in CA. Primary effectiveness was 65.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 50.7%-80.9%) with HC vs 37.0% (95% CI 5.1%-52.4%) with CA (P = .022). Through 18 months, these rates were 60.5% (95% CI 50.0%-76.1%) with HC vs 25.9% (95% CI 9.4%-42.5%) with CA (P = .006). Secondary effectiveness rates were higher than CA with HC at 12 and 18 months. Freedom from atrial arrhythmias off AADs was 52.6% (95% CI 36.8%-68.5%) and 47.4% (95% CI 31.5%-63.2%) with HC at 12 and 18 months vs 25.9% (95% CI 9.4%-42.5%) and 22.2% (95% CI 6.5%-37.9%) with CA, respectively (12 months: P = .031; 18 months: P = .038). Three (7.9%) major adverse events occurred within 30 days of HC. Conclusion: Post hoc analysis demonstrated effectiveness and acceptable safety of HC compared with CA in LSPAF.

Hybrid Convergent Procedure for the Treatment of Persistent and Long-Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: Results of CONVERGE Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The limited effectiveness of endocardial catheter ablation (CA) for persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment led to the development of a minimally invasive epicardial/endocardial ablation approach (Hybrid Convergent) to achieve a more comprehensive lesion set with durable transmural lesions. The multicenter randomized controlled CONVERGE trial (Convergence of Epicardial and Endocardial Ablation for the Treatment of Symptomatic Persistent AF) evaluated the safety of Hybrid Convergent and compared its effectiveness to CA for persistent and long-standing persistent AF treatment. METHODS: One-hundred fifty-three patients were randomized 2:1 to Hybrid Convergent versus CA. Primary effectiveness was freedom from AF/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia absent new/increased dosage of previously failed/intolerant class I/III antiarrhythmic drugs through 12 months. Primary safety was major adverse events through 30 days. CONVERGE permitted left atrium size up to 6 cm and imposed no limits on AF duration, making it the only ablation trial to substantially include long-standing persistent-AF, that is, 42% patients with long-standing persistent-AF. RESULTS: Of 149 evaluable patients at 12 months, primary effectiveness was achieved in 67.7% (67/99) patients with Hybrid Convergent and 50.0% (25/50) with CA (P=0.036) on/off previously failed antiarrhythmic drugs and in 53.5% (53/99) versus 32.0% (16/50; P=0.0128) respectively off antiarrhythmic drugs. At 18 months using 7-day Holter, 74.0% (53/72) Hybrid Convergent and 55% (23/42) CA patients experienced ≥90% AF burden reduction. A total of 2.9% (3/102) patients had primary safety events within 7 days, and 4.9% (5/102) between 8 and 30 days postprocedure. No deaths, cardiac perforations, or atrioesophageal fistulas occurred. All but one primary safety event resolved. CONCLUSIONS: The Hybrid Convergent procedure has superior effectiveness compared to the CA for the treatment of persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01984346.

In-office insertion of a miniaturized insertable cardiac monitor: Results from the Reveal LINQ In-Office 2 randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Recent miniaturization of an insertable cardiac monitor (ICM) may make it possible to move device insertion from a hospital to office setting. However, the safety of this strategy is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to compare the safety of inserting the Reveal LINQ ICM in an office vs a hospital environment. Ancillary objectives included summarizing device- and procedure-related adverse events and responses to a physician questionnaire. METHODS: Five hundred twenty-one patients indicated for an ICM were randomized (1:1 ratio) to undergo ICM insertion in a hospital or office environment at 26 centers in the United States in the Reveal LINQ In-Office 2 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02395536). Patients were followed for 90 days. RESULTS: ICM insertion was successful in all 482 attempted patients (office: 251; hospital: 231). The untoward event rate (composite of unsuccessful insertion and ICM- or insertion-related complications) was 0.8% (2 of 244) in the office and 0.9% (2 of 227) in the hospital (95% confidence interval, -3.0% to 2.9%; 5% noninferiority: P < .001). In addition, adverse events occurred during 2.5% (6 of 244) of office and 4.4% (10 of 227) of hospital insertions (95% confidence interval [office minus inhospital rates], -5.8% to 1.9%; 5% noninferiority: P < .001). Physicians indicated that for procedures performed in an office vs a hospital, there were fewer delays >15 minutes (16% vs 35%; P < .001) and patient response was more often "very positive." Physicians considered the office location "very convenient" more frequently than the hospital location (85% vs 27%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: The safety profile for the insertion of the Reveal LINQ ICM is excellent irrespective of insertion environment. These results may expand site of service options for LINQ insertion.

Radiofrequency septal reduction in symptomatic hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol septal ablation remains the only approved nonsurgical therapeutic alternative for patients with drug-resistant hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM). Radiofrequency (RF) ablation offers another option for treating HOCM. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether irrigated RF ablation can reduce symptomatic outflow tract obstruction in adults with HOCM. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic HOCM and an outflow gradient of >50 mm Hg despite medication were offered RF ablation. In 11 patients, the hypertrophied interventricular septum was localized on a 3-dimensional mapping system and ablated via a transmitral or retrograde aortic approach. RESULTS: Ten of 11(91%) patients had a significant and persistent reduction in resting and provocable left ventricular outflow tract gradients. Mean resting gradients at 12 months postprocedure were reduced by 85% (66.7 mm Hg at baseline to 10.0 mm Hg at 12 months); mean provocable gradients were reduced by 85% from baseline (136.2 mm Hg at baseline to 20.0 mm Hg at 12 months). Functional New York Heart Association heart classification improved from class 3.0 ± 0.0 in all patients to class mean of 1.8 ± 0.8. CONCLUSION: RF septal ablation for the treatment of HOCM is a safe therapeutic option that allows for significant reduction in left ventricular outflow tract gradients, improvement in symptoms, and increase in efficacy rates comparable to reported rates for alcohol septal ablation.