A heart-team hybrid approach for atrial fibrillation: a single-centre long-term clinical outcome cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The Cox-maze IV is the gold standard for surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). A heart-team hybrid approach using selected epicardial thoracoscopic surgical ablations and completion endocardial ablations to replicate the Cox-maze IV lesion set has gained popularity and early results have been promising. We herein report our single-centre long-term clinical outcomes using the heart-team hybrid approach with 455 patients. METHODS: From 1 March 2013 to 1 July 2019, we prospectively collected data on all patients referred to our heart team for rhythm-control strategy for AF. Baseline characteristics, procedural complications and long-term freedom from AF (FFAF) both on and off anti-arrhythmic drug therapy were analysed. Ambulatory monitoring (>7 days) was obtained at 3 months and annually thereafter. RESULTS: Four hundred and fifty-five patients completed the hybrid approach. Four hundred and forty-five (97.8%) patients had non-paroxysmal AF (long-standing persistent AF n = 249, 54.7%; persistent AF n = 196, 43.1%; paroxysmal AF n = 10, 2.2%). Average duration of AF was 5.9 ± 6.1 years. Average left atrial diameter was 4.8 ± 0.8 cm. FFAF at 3, 12, 24 and 36 months was 92%, 87%, 81% and 72%, respectively. FFAF without the use of anti-arrhythmic medications was 75%, 81%, 76% and 66%. Any surgical complications occurred in 28 (6.1%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: A heart-team hybrid strategy for the treatment of AF is safe and effective. In a predominantly non-paroxysmal population with AF, at the 3-year follow-up, FFAF in patients on and off anti-arrhythmic drugs approaches that of patients who had the Cox-maze IV.

Using Discrete Event Simulation to Model the Economic Value of Shorter Procedure Times on EP Lab Efficiency in the VALUE PVI Study.

BACKGROUND: The VALUE PVI study demonstrated that atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation procedures and electrophysiology laboratory (EP lab) occupancy times were reduced for the cryoballoon compared with focal radiofrequency (RF) ablation. However, the economic impact associated with the cryoballoon procedure for hospitals has not been determined. OBJECTIVE: Assess the economic value associated with shorter AF ablation procedure times based on VALUE PVI data. METHODS AND RESULTS: A model was formulated from data from the VALUE PVI study. This model used a discrete event simulation to translate procedural efficiencies into metrics utilized by hospital administrators. A 1000-day period was simulated to determine the accrued impact of procedure time on an institution's EP lab when considering staff and hospital resources. The simulation demonstrated that procedures performed with the cryoballoon catheter resulted in several efficiencies, including: (1) a reduction of 36.2% in days with overtime (422 days RF vs 60 days cryoballoon); (2) 92.7% less cumulative overtime hours (370 hours RF vs 27 hours cryoballoon); and (3) an increase of 46.7% in days with time for an additional EP lab usage (186 days RF vs 653 days cryoballoon). Importantly, the added EP lab utilization could not support the time required for an additional AF ablation procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The discrete event simulation of the VALUE PVI data demonstrates the potential positive economic value of AF ablation procedures using the cryoballoon. These benefits include more days where overtime is avoided, fewer cumulative overtime hours, and more days with time left for additional usage of EP lab resources.

Comparison of resource utilization of pulmonary vein isolation: cryoablation versus RF ablation with three-dimensional mapping in the Value PVI Study.

BACKGROUND: Point-to-point focal radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation for aberrant pulmonary vein triggers that manifest into atrial fibrillation (AF) is the traditional method for treating symptomatic drug-resistant paroxysmal AF (PAF) when an ablation procedure is warranted. More recently, pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using the cryoballoon has been demonstrated to be safe and effective (STOP AF clinical trial). Currently, two small studies have reviewed the procedural efficiency when comparing cryoballoon to focal RF catheter ablation procedures; however, no multicenter study has yet reported on this comparison of the two types of ablation catheters. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective chart extraction and evaluation was conducted at seven geographically mixed cardiac care centers. The study examined procedural variables during ablation for PVI in PAF patients. RESULTS: In several procedural measurements, the two modalities were comparable in efficiencies, including: acute PVI >96%; length of hospital stay at approximately 27 hours; and about 30% usage of adenosine after procedural testing. However, when compared to RF catheters, the cryoballoon procedure demonstrated a 13% reduction in laboratory occupancy time (247 min vs 283 min), a 13% reduction in procedure time (174 min vs 200 min), and a 21% reduction in fluoroscopy time (33 min vs 42 min). Additionally, when comparing the material usage of both cryoballoon and RF catheters, the cryoballoon used more radiopaque contrast agent (78 cc vs 29 cc) while using less intraprocedural saline (1234 cc vs 2386 cc), intracardiac echocardiography (88% vs 99%), three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping (30% vs 87%), and fewer transseptal punctures (1.5 vs 1.9). CONCLUSION: This study is the first United States multicenter examination to report the procedural comparisons between the cryoballoon and focal RF catheters when used for the treatment of PAF patients. In this hospital chart review study, potential advantages were found when operating the cryoballoon with regard to hospital resource allocation. There was no statistical difference between cryoballoon and RF catheters for acute PVI success during the ablation procedure.