RESUMEN
AIMS: Findings regarding efficacy of substrate modification for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) are inconsistent. We prospectively compared clinical outcomes of complex fractionated atrial electrogram (CFAE)-guided focal ablation (CFA) and CFAE-guided linear ablation (CLA) in patients with non-paroxysmal AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomized 150 patients with non-paroxysmal AF into CFA and CLA groups in a 1:1 ratio. Complex fractionated atrial electrogram distribution was evaluated using an automated algorithm of a three-dimensional mapping system. After pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), CFAE-guided ablation was performed in the left atrium and then in the right atrium (RA). When compared with conventional CFA, CLA was performed based on conventional lines, with additional lines. Atrial fibrillation was not induced after PVI alone or with cavotricuspid isthmus ablation in 20.7% of patients. To achieve the endpoint, additional CFAE-guided RA ablation was required in 42.7% and 36.0% of patients undergoing CFA and CLA, respectively (P = 0.403). Atrial fibrillation was terminated during CFAE-guided ablation in 72.9% and 75.0% of patients undergoing CFA and CLA, respectively (P = 0.792). Termination of atrial tachycardia (AT) or non-inducibility of AF/AT was achieved in 61.3% and 68.0% of patients undergoing CFA and CLA, respectively (P = 0.393). The CLA group showed decreased 1-year freedom from AF/AT recurrence (60.0%, CFA vs. 47.3%, CLA; log rank P = 0.085), but no significant difference throughout the follow-up (22.2 ± 21.0 months) (67.1%, CFA vs. 68.9%, CLA; log rank P = 0.298). CONCLUSION: Long-term efficacy of CFAE-guided ablation was unaffected by the ablation technique in patients with non-paroxysmal AF.