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.

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.

Association Between Age and Outcomes of Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: Results From the CABANA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Observational data suggest that catheter ablation may be safe and effective to treat younger and older patients with atrial fibrillation. No large, randomized trial has examined this issue. This report describes outcomes according to age at entry in the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation). METHODS: Patients with atrial fibrillation ≥65 years of age, or <65 with ≥1 risk factor for stroke, were randomly assigned to catheter ablation versus drug therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, the composite of mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, and recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Treatment effect estimates were adjusted for baseline covariables using proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: Of 2204 patients randomly assigned in CABANA, 766 (34.8%) were <65 years of age, 1130 (51.3%) were 65 to 74 years of age, and 308 (14.0%) were ≥75 years of age. Catheter ablation was associated with a 43% reduction in the primary outcome for patients <65 years of age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.57 [95% CI, 0.30-1.09]), a 21% reduction for 65 to 74 years of age (aHR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.54-1.16]), and an indeterminate effect for age ≥75 years of age (aHR, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.75-2.58]). Four-year event rates for ablation versus drug therapy across age groups, respectively, were 3.2% versus 7.8%, 7.8% versus 9.6%, and 14.8% versus 9.0%. For every 10-year increase in age, the primary outcome aHR increased (ie, less favorable to ablation) an average of 27% (interaction P value=0.215). A similar pattern was seen with all-cause mortality: for every 10-year increase in age, the aHR increased an average of 46% (interaction P value=0.111). Atrial fibrillation recurrence rates were lower with ablation than with drug therapy across age subgroups (aHR 0.47, 0.58, and 0.49, respectively). Treatment-related complications were infrequent for both arms (<3%) regardless of age. CONCLUSIONS: We found age-based variations in clinical outcomes for catheter ablation compared with drug therapy, with the largest relative and absolute benefits of catheter ablation in younger patients. No prognostic benefits for ablation were seen in the oldest patients. No differences were found by age in treatment-related complications or in the relative effectiveness of catheter ablation in preventing recurrent atrial arrhythmias. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT00911508.

Cost-Effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: The CABANA Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation), catheter ablation did not significantly reduce the primary end point of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest compared with drug therapy by intention-to-treat, but did improve the quality of life and freedom from atrial fibrillation recurrence. In the heart failure subgroup, ablation improved both survival and quality of life. Cost-effectiveness was a prespecified CABANA secondary end point. METHODS: Medical resource use data were collected for all CABANA patients (N=2204). Costs for hospital-based care were assigned using prospectively collected bills from US patients (n=1171); physician and medication costs were assigned using the Medicare Fee Schedule and National Average Drug Acquisition Costs, respectively. Extrapolated life expectancies were estimated using age-based survival models. Quality-of-life adjustments were based on EQ-5D-based utilities measured during the trial. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, comparing ablation with drug therapy on the basis of intention-to-treat, and assessed from the US health care sector perspective. RESULTS: Costs in the first 3 months averaged $20 794±SD 1069 higher with ablation compared with drug therapy. The cumulative within-trial 5-year cost difference was $19 245 (95% CI, $11 360-$27 170) and the lifetime mean cost difference was $15 516 (95% CI, -$2963 to $35,512) higher with ablation than with drug therapy. The drug therapy arm accrued an average of 12.5 life-years (LYs) and 10.7 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). For the ablation arm, the corresponding estimates were 12.6 LYs and 11.0 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $57 893 per QALY gained, with 75% of bootstrap replications yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$100 000 per QALY gained. With no quality-of-life/utility adjustments, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $183 318 per LY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation was economically attractive compared with drug therapy in the CABANA Trial overall at present benchmarks for health care value in the United States on the basis of projected incremental QALYs but not LYs alone.

Association Between Sex and Treatment Outcomes of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Versus Drug Therapy: Results From the CABANA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), women are less likely to receive catheter ablation and may have more complications and less durable results. Most information about sex-specific differences after ablation comes from observational data. We prespecified an examination of outcomes by sex in the 2204-patient CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation). METHODS: CABANA randomized patients with AF age ≥65 years or <65 years with ≥1 risk factor for stroke to a strategy of catheter ablation with pulmonary vein isolation versus drug therapy with rate/rhythm control agents. The primary composite outcome was death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest, and key secondary outcomes included AF recurrence. RESULTS: CABANA randomized 819 (37%) women (ablation 413, drug 406) and 1385 men (ablation 695, drug 690). Compared with men, women were older (median age, 69 years versus 67 years for men), were more symptomatic (48% Canadian Cardiovascular Society AF Severity Class 3 or 4 versus 39% for men), had more symptomatic heart failure (42% with New York Heart Association Class ≥II versus 32% for men), and more often had a paroxysmal AF pattern at enrollment (50% versus 39% for men) (P<0.0001 for all). Women were less likely to have ancillary (nonpulmonary vein) ablation procedures performed during the index procedure (55.7% versus 62.2% in men, P=0.043), and complications from treatment were infrequent in both sexes. For the primary outcome, the hazard ratio for those who underwent ablation versus drug therapy was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.62-1.65) in women and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.51-1.05) in men (interaction P value=0.299). The risk of recurrent AF was significantly reduced in patients undergoing ablation compared with those receiving drug therapy regardless of sex, but the effect was greater in men (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.51-0.82] for women versus hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.40-0.58] for men; interaction P value=0.060). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically relevant treatment-related strategy differences in the primary and secondary clinical outcomes of CABANA were not seen between men and women, and there were no sex differences in adverse events. The CABANA trial results support catheter ablation as an effective treatment strategy for both women and men. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00911508.

Ablation Versus Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure: Results From the CABANA Trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation (AF), several clinical trials have reported improved outcomes, including freedom from AF recurrence, quality of life, and survival, with catheter ablation. This article describes the treatment-related outcomes of the AF patients with heart failure enrolled in the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation). METHODS: The CABANA trial randomized 2204 patients with AF who were ≥65 years old or <65 years old with ≥1 risk factor for stroke at 126 sites to ablation with pulmonary vein isolation or drug therapy including rate or rhythm control drugs. Of these, 778 (35%) had New York Heart Association class >II at baseline and form the subject of this article. The CABANA trial's primary end point was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. RESULTS: Of the 778 patients with heart failure enrolled in CABANA, 378 were assigned to ablation and 400 to drug therapy. Ejection fraction at baseline was available for 571 patients (73.0%), and 9.3% of these had an ejection fraction <40%, whereas 11.7% had ejection fractions between 40% and 50%. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the ablation arm had a 36% relative reduction in the primary composite end point (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.41-0.99]) and a 43% relative reduction in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.33-0.96]) compared with drug therapy alone over a median follow-up of 48.5 months. AF recurrence was decreased with ablation (hazard ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.42-0.74]). The adjusted mean difference for the AFEQT (Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life) summary score averaged over the entire 60-month follow-up was 5.0 points, favoring the ablation arm (95% CI, 2.5-7.4 points), and the MAFSI (Mayo Atrial Fibrillation-Specific Symptom Inventory) frequency score difference was -2.0 points, favoring ablation (95% CI, -2.9 to -1.2). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF enrolled in the CABANA trial who had clinically diagnosed stable heart failure at trial entry, catheter ablation produced clinically important improvements in survival, freedom from AF recurrence, and quality of life relative to drug therapy. These results, obtained in a cohort most of whom had preserved left ventricular function, require independent trial verification. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00911508; Unique identifier: NCT0091150.

The hemodynamic spectrum of pulmonary vein stenosis from fibrosing mediastinitis.

A 63-year-old man presented with hemoptysis and progressive dyspnea. His echocardiogram was concerning for pulmonary hypertension (PH) and CT chest showed fibrosing mediastinitis with possible cardiac involvement. Right heart catheterization revealed PH at rest and worsened with exercise. CT findings and simultaneous measurement of pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP), left atrial pressure, and left ventricular pressure helped diagnose pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis as the etiology of his PH. Both upper pulmonary veins were stented, and repeat exercise hemodynamic study revealed a substantial reduction in pulmonary arterial pressure with improvement in subjective dyspnea, cardiac output reserve, mechanical efficiency, and ventilatory efficiency. Repeat right upper PCWP normalized, consistent with resolution of the PV stenosis.

Influence of atrial fibrillation type on outcomes of ablation vs. drug therapy: results from CABANA.

AIMS: Influence of atrial fibrillation (AF) type on outcomes seen with catheter ablation vs. drug therapy is incompletely understood. This study assesses the impact of AF type on treatment outcomes in the Catheter Ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation Trial (CABANA). METHODS AND RESULTS: CABANA randomized 2204 patients ≥65 years old or <65 with at least one risk factor for stroke to catheter ablation or drug therapy. Of these, 946 (42.9%) had paroxysmal AF (PAF), 1042 (47.3%) had persistent AF (PersAF), and 215 (9.8%) had long-standing persistent AF (LSPAF) at baseline. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Symptoms were measured with the Mayo AF-Specific Symptom Inventory (MAFSI), and quality of life was measured with the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT). Comparisons are reported by intention to treat. Compared with drug therapy alone, catheter ablation produced a 19% relative risk reduction in the primary endpoint for PAF {adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.81 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50, 1.30]}, and a 17% relative reduction for PersAF (aHR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.56, 1.22). For LSPAF, the ablation relative effect was a 7% reduction (aHR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.36, 2.44). Ablation was more effective than drug therapy at reducing first AF recurrence in all AF types: by 51% for PAF (aHR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39, 0.62), by 47% for PersAF (aHR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.43,0.65), and by 36% for LSPAF (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41,1.00). Ablation was associated with greater improvement in symptoms, with the mean difference between groups in the MAFSI frequency score favouring ablation over 5 years of follow-up in all subgroups: PAF had a clinically significant -1.9-point difference (95% CI: -1.2 to -2.6); PersAF a -0.9 difference (95% CI: -0.2 to -1.6); LSPAF a clinically significant difference of -1.6 points (95% CI: -0.1 to -3.1). Ablation was also associated with greater improvement in quality of life in all subgroups, with the AFEQT overall score in PAF patients showing a clinically significant 5.3-point improvement (95% CI: 3.3 to 7.3) over drug therapy alone over 5 years of follow-up, PersAF a 1.7-point difference (95% CI: 0.0 to 3.7), and LSPAF a 3.1-point difference (95% CI: -1.6 to 7.8). CONCLUSION: Prognostic treatment effects of catheter ablation compared with drug therapy on the primary and major secondary clinical endpoints did not differ consequentially by AF subtype. With regard to decreases in AF recurrence and improving quality of life, ablation was more effective than drug therapy in all three AF type subgroups. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00911508.

Arrhythmia Recurrence After Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: Impact of Warfarin vs. Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants.

PURPOSE: Both warfarin and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have pleiotropic effects including anti-inflammatory and anti-fibrotic properties. This study aims to explore whether arrhythmia recurrence after AF ablation is influenced by the choice of oral anticoagulant. METHODS: We retrospectively studied all patients who underwent primary AF ablation between 2011 and 2017 and divided them into two groups according to the anticoagulant used: Warfarin vs. NOACs. The primary endpoint was atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence after ablation. RESULTS: Of the 1106 patients who underwent AF ablation in the study period (median age 62.5 years; 71.5% males, 48.2% persistent AF), 697 (63%) received warfarin and 409 (37%) received NOACs. After a median of 26.4 months follow-up, arrhythmia recurrence was noted in 368 patients in warfarin group and 173 patients in NOACs group, with a 1-year recurrence probability of 35% vs. 36% (log rank P = 0.81) and 5-year recurrence probability of 62% vs. 63% (Log rank P = 0.32). However, NOACs use was associated with a higher probability of recurrence (46% for 1 year, 68% for 5 years) in patients with persistent AF compared with those taking warfarin (34% for 1 year, 63% for 5 years; log rank P = 0.01 and P = 0.02 respectively). Multivariate analysis indicated that in patients with persistent AF, use of NOACs was an independent risk factor of atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence after ablation (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.07-1.81, P = 0.013). CONCLUSION: In this large contemporary cohort, overall AF recurrence after ablation was similar with NOACs or warfarin use. However, in patients with persistent AF, NOACs use was associated with a higher probability of arrhythmia recurrence and was an independent risk factor of recurrence at long-term follow-up.

Research Needs and Priorities for Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report From a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Virtual Workshop.

Catheter ablation has brought major advances in the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). As evidenced by multiple randomized trials, AF catheter ablation can reduce the risk of recurrent AF and improve quality of life. In some studies, AF ablation significantly reduced cardiovascular hospitalizations. Despite the existing data on AF catheter ablation, numerous knowledge gaps remain concerning this intervention. This report is based on a recent virtual workshop convened by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to identify key research opportunities in AF ablation. We outline knowledge gaps related to emerging technologies, the relationship between cardiac structure and function and the success of AF ablation in patient subgroups in whom clinical benefit from ablation varies, and potential platforms to advance clinical research in this area. This report also considers the potential value and challenges of a sham ablation randomized trial. Prioritized research opportunities are identified and highlighted to empower relevant stakeholders to collaborate in designing and conducting effective, cost-efficient, and transformative research to optimize the use and outcomes of AF ablation.

Initial rhythm control with cryoballoon ablation vs drug therapy: Impact on quality of life and symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) as a first-line rhythm control strategy is superior to antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) for preventing atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence; the impact of first-line CBA on quality of life (QoL) and symptoms has not been well characterized. METHODS: Patients aged 18 to 75 with symptomatic paroxysmal AF naïve to rhythm control therapy were randomized (1:1) to CBA (Arctic Front Advance, Medtronic) or AAD (Class I or III). Symptoms and QoL were assessed at baseline, 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months using the EHRA classification and Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-Life (AFEQT) and SF-36v2 questionnaires. Symptomatic palpitations were evaluated via patient diary. RESULTS: Overall, 107 patients were randomized to CBA and 111 to AAD; crossovers occurred in 9%. Larger improvements in the AFEQT summary, subscale and treatment satisfaction scores were observed at 12 months with CBA vs AAD (all P <0.05). At 12 months, the mean adjusted difference in the AFEQT summary score was 9.9 points higher in the CBA group (95% CI: 5.5 -14.2, P <0.001). Clinically important improvements in the SF-36 physical and mental component scores were observed at 12 months in both groups, with no significant between group differences at this timepoint. In the CBA vs AAD group, larger improvements in EHRA class were observed at 6, 9 and 12 months (P <0.05) and the incidence rate of symptomatic palpitations was lower (4.6 vs 15.2 days/year post-blanking; IRR: 0.30, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with symptomatic AF, first-line CBA was superior to AAD for improving AF-specific QoL and symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01803438.

Real-time intracardiac echocardiography validation of saline-enhanced radiofrequency needle-tip ablation: lesion characteristics and gross pathology correlation.

AIMS: With the implementation of saline-enhanced radiofrequency (SERF) needle-tip ablation, real-time validation of lesion formation is needed for the controllable creation of transmural lesions. The aim of the study was to analyse the ability of two-dimensional intracardiac echocardiography (2D-ICE) to guide and validate SERF ablation in real-time. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifty-six SERF energy deliveries at left ventricular sites of 11 dogs guided by 2D-ICE were analysed (power: 15-50 W; time: 25-120 s; irrigation saline: 60°C with 10 mL/min flow rate). Catheter tip/tissue orientation and lesion formation could be well detected by 2D-ICE in 49 (87.5%) energy deliveries. Gross pathology analysis confirmed excellent 2D-ICE lesion localization, the ability to detect transmural lesions (70% sensitivity, 47% specificity) and positive correlation between 2D-ICE and the corresponding gross pathology measurements of 'maximal lesion depth'; (repeated measures correlation: rrm = 0.43, P = 0.012) and 'depth at maximal lesion width' (D@MW; rrm = 0.51, P = 0.003). The median angle between SERF catheter tip and endocardium was 76° [interquartile range (IQR) 58-83°]. The more perpendicular the catheter tip/tissue orientation was the deeper D@MW (rrm = 0.32, P = 0.045). Grade 3 microbubbles on 2D-ICE during ablation, indicating inadequate catheter tip/tissue contact, was associated with smaller lesion volumes than with Grade 1 microbubbles (284.8 mm3 [IQR 151.3-343.1] vs. 2114.1 mm3 [IQR 1437.0-3026.3], P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: With excellent lesion localization and a 70% detection rate of transmural lesions, 2D-ICE is well suited to validate SERF ablation lesion formation in real-time. The catheter tip/tissue angle impacts the lesion formation and through perpendicular catheter positioning, deeper intramural areas of the myocardium can be reached.

Cryoballoon ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drugs: first-line therapy for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Treatment guidelines for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) suggest that patients should be managed with an antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) before undergoing catheter ablation (CA). This study evaluated whether pulmonary vein isolation employing cryoballoon CA is superior to AAD therapy for the prevention of atrial arrhythmia (AA) recurrence in rhythm control naive patients with paroxysmal AF (PAF). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 218 treatment naive patients with symptomatic PAF were randomized (1 : 1) to cryoballoon CA (Arctic Front Advance, Medtronic) or AAD (Class I or III) and followed for 12 months. The primary endpoint was ≥1 episode of recurrent AA (AF, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia) >30 s after a prespecified 90-day blanking period. Secondary endpoints included the rate of serious adverse events (SAEs) and recurrence of symptomatic palpitations (evaluated via patient diaries). Freedom from AA was achieved in 82.2% of subjects in the cryoballoon arm and 67.6% of subjects in the AAD arm (HR = 0.48, P = 0.01). There were no group differences in the time-to-first (HR = 0.76, P = 0.28) or overall incidence [incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.79, P = 0.28] of SAEs. The incidence rate of symptomatic palpitations was lower in the cryoballoon (7.61 days/year) compared with the AAD arm (18.96 days/year; IRR = 0.40, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cryoballoon CA was superior to AAD therapy, significantly reducing AA recurrence in treatment naive patients with PAF. Additionally, cryoballoon CA was associated with lower symptom recurrence and a similar rate of SAEs compared with AAD therapy.

Sinus rhythm heart rate increase after atrial fibrillation ablation is associated with lower risk of arrhythmia recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with autonomic modulation may be more successful than PVI alone for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and may be signaled by changes in sinus rhythm heart rate (HR) post ablation. We sought to determine if a change in sinus rhythm HR predicted AF recurrence post PVI. METHODS: Patients who underwent AF ablation from 2000 to 2011 were included if sinus rhythm was noted on ECG within 90 days pre and 7 days post ablation. Basic ECG interval and HR changes were analyzed and outcomes determined. RESULTS: A total of 1152 patients were identified (74.3% male, mean age 57 ± 11 years). Mean AF duration was 5.2 ± 5.3 years. Paroxysmal AF was noted in 712 (61.8%) of the patients. Mean EF was 61% ± 6%. Sinus rhythm HR was 61 ± 11 pre-ablation and 76 ± 13 bpm post-ablation (27% ± 24% increase, p < .001). The ability of relative HR change post-ablation to predict AF recurrence was borderline (hazard ratio 0.65 [0.41-1.01], p = .067). With patients separated into quartiles based on the relative HR change, the upper quartile with the largest relative increase in HR had a significantly lower rate of AF recurrence compared to the lowest quartile following multi variable modeling (p = .038). There were significant changes in PR (171 ± 28 to 167 ± 30 ms) and QTc (424 ± 25 to 434 ± 29 ms) intervals (both p < .001) but these were not predictive of outcome. CONCLUSION: Relative changes in HR post AF ablation correlates with AF recurrence. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm this relationship.

Cryoballoon catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drugs as a first-line therapy for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: Rationale and design of the international Cryo-FIRST study.

BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency current (RFC) catheter ablation for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) has been shown to be safe and effective in first-line therapy. Recent data demonstrates that RFC ablation provides better clinical outcomes compared to antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) in the treatment of early AF disease. Furthermore, studies comparing RFC and cryoballoon have established comparable efficacy and safety of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF. OBJECTIVES: The Cryo-FIRST trial was designed to compare AAD treatment against cryoballoon PVI as a first-line therapy in treatment naïve patients with AF. Efficacy and safety will be compared between the two cohorts and amongst subgroups. METHODS: The primary hypothesis is that cryoablation is superior to AAD therapy. To test this hypothesis, patients will be randomized in a 1:1 design. Using a 90-day blanking period, primary efficacy endpoint failure is defined as (at least) one episode of atrial arrhythmia with a duration >30 sec (documented by 7-day Holter or 12-lead ECG). Secondary endpoints (Quality-of-Life, rehospitalization, arrhythmia recurrence rate, healthcare utilization, and left atrial function) and adverse events will also be evaluated. Study enrollment will include 218 patients in up to 16 centers. CONCLUSIONS: This study will be a multi-national randomized controlled trial comparing cryoablation against AAD as a first-line treatment in patients with paroxysmal AF. The results may help guide the selection of patients for early AF disease therapy via cryoballoon ablation.

Recurrent pulmonary vein stenosis after successful intervention: Prognosis and management of restenosis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe management of recurrent pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS) and determine if stenting is superior to balloon angioplasty (BA) in preventing subsequent restenosis. BACKGROUND: PVS is a serious complication of atrial fibrillation ablation. BA and stenting are effective therapies; however, restenosis frequently occurs. Here we report management of recurrent stenosis. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study performed from 2000 to 2014. RESULTS: One hundred and thirteen patients with severe PVS underwent intervention in 88 veins treated with BA and 81 treated with stenting. Forty-two patients experienced restenosis. Restenosis was more common in veins treated with BA (RRR 53% [95% CI 32-70%, p = .008]). A second intervention was performed in 41 patients. In the 34 vessels treated with initial BA, 24 were treated for restenosis with a stent and 10 were treated with a second BA. The recurrence rate was 46% in those treated with BA followed by stenting and 50% in those treated with two BA procedures. In the 22 veins treated with initial stenting, 9 were treated with another stent and 13 were treated with BA. The recurrence rate was 44% in those treated with a second stent and 46% for those treated with a stent followed by BA. The risk of a third stenosis was the same among all groups (Analysis of variance [ANOVA] p = .99). Limited sample size precluded analysis of outcome by stent size. CONCLUSIONS: Restenosis occurred in 44% of patients overall. Management is challenging; stenting does not appear to be superior to BA.

Atrial fibrillation ablation in practice: assessing CABANA generalizability.

AIMS: The Catheter Ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation (CABANA) trial aimed to assess the impact of ablation on morbidity and mortality. This observational study was conducted in parallel to CABANA to assess trial generalizability. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a large US administrative database, we identified 183 760 patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with ablation or medical therapy (antiarrhythmic or rate control drugs) between 1 August 2009 and 30 April 2016 (CABANA enrolment period). Propensity score weighting was used to balance patients treated with ablation (N = 12 032) or medical therapy alone (N = 171 728) on 90 dimensions. Ablation was associated with a reduction in the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, and cardiac arrest [hazard ratio (HR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.81; P < 0.001]. The majority of patients (73.8%) were potentially trial eligible; among whom the risk reduction associated with ablation was greatest (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.63-0.77; P < 0.001). Among the 3.8% of patients who failed to meet the inclusion criterion, i.e. patients under 65 years without stroke risk factors, the event rates were low and there was no significant relationship with ablation (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29-1.56; P = 0.35). Among the 22.4% patients who met at least one of the trial exclusion criteria, there was a lesser but statistically significant reduction associated with ablation (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75-0.95; P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: In routine clinical care, ablation was associated with a reduction in the primary CABANA composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, and cardiac arrest, particularly in patients who were eligible for the trial.

Mortality and Cerebrovascular Events After Heart Rhythm Disorder Management Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Recognition of rates and causes of hard, patient-centered outcomes of death and cerebrovascular events (CVEs) after heart rhythm disorder management (HRDM) procedures is an essential step for the development of quality improvement programs in electrophysiology laboratories. Our primary aim was to assess and characterize death and CVEs (stroke or transient ischemic attack) after HRDM procedures over a 17-year period. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing HRDM procedures between January 2000 and November 2016 at the Mayo Clinic. Patients from all 3 tertiary academic centers (Rochester, Phoenix, and Jacksonville) were included in the study. All in-hospital deaths and CVEs after HRDM procedures were identified and were further characterized as directly or indirectly related to the HRDM procedure. Subgroup analysis of death and CVE rates was performed for ablation, device implantation, electrophysiology study, lead extraction, and defibrillation threshold testing procedures. RESULTS: A total of 48 913 patients (age, 65.7±6.6 years; 64% male) who underwent a total of 62 065 HRDM procedures were included in the study. The overall mortality and CVE rates in the cohort were 0.36% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-0.42) and 0.12% (95% CI, 0.09-0.16), respectively. Patients undergoing lead extraction had the highest overall mortality rate at 1.9% (95% CI, 1.34-2.61) and CVE rate at 0.62% (95% CI, 0.32-1.07). Among patients undergoing HRDM procedures, 48% of deaths directly related to the HDRM procedure were among patients undergoing device implantation procedures. Overall, cardiac tamponade was the most frequent direct cause of death (40%), and infection was the most common indirect cause of death (29%). The overall 30-day mortality rate was 0.76%, with the highest being in lead extraction procedures (3.08%), followed by device implantation procedures (0.94%). CONCLUSIONS: Half of the deaths directly related to an HRDM procedure were among the patients undergoing device implantation procedures, with cardiac tamponade being the most common cause of death. This highlights the importance of the development of protocols for the quick identification and management of cardiac tamponade even in procedures typically believed to be lower risk such as device implantation.

Economic impact of contact force sensing in catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: The TactiCath Contact Force Ablation Catheter Study for Atrial Fibrillation (TOCCASTAR) clinical trial compared clinical outcomes using a contact force (CF) sensing ablation catheter (TactiCath) with a catheter that lacked CF measurement. This analysis links recorded events in the TOCCASTAR study and a large claims database, IBM MarketScan®, to determine the economic impact of using CF sensing during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Clinical events including repeat ablation, use of antiarrhythmic drugs, hospitalization, perforation, pericarditis, pneumothorax, pulmonary edema, pulmonary vein stenosis, tamponade, and vascular access complications were adjudicated in the year after ablation. CF was characterized as optimal if greater than or equal to 90% lesion was performed with greater than or equal to 10 g of CF. A probabilistic 1:1 linkage was created for subjects in MarketScan® with the same events in the year after ablation, and the cost was evaluated over 10 000 iterations. Of the 279 subjects in TOCCASTAR, 145 were ablated using CF (57% with optimal CF), and 134 were ablated without CF. In the MarketScan® cohort, 9811 subjects who underwent AF ablation were used to determine events and costs. For subjects ablated with optimal CF, total cost was $19 271 ± 3705 in the year after ablation. For ablation lacking CF measurement, cost was $22 673 ± 3079 (difference of $3402, P < .001). In 73% of simulations, optimal CF was associated with lower cost in the year after ablation. CONCLUSION: Compared to ablation without CF, there was a decrease in healthcare cost of $3402 per subject in the first year after the procedure when optimal CF was used.

Outcome of combined cryo- and radiofrequency-catheter ablation in patients with supraventricular tachycardias.

BACKGROUND: There are few data regarding the outcome of a combined cryo- and radiofrequency (RF)-catheter ablation of various types of supraventricular tachycardias (SVTs) originating from near the normal conduction system. METHODS: We analyzed all patients undergoing combined cryo- and RF- catheter ablation at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN as part of the ablation of SVTs with potential risks of injury to the normal conduction system. This study aimed to assess the outcome of a combined cryo- and RF-catheter ablation of various types of SVTs. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 54 patients (38 ± 17 years, 32 men). A combined cryo- and RF-catheter ablation was attempted for septal accessary pathways (APs) in 26, atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) in 14, atrial tachycardia (AT) in 7, and junctional ectopic tachycardia in 7 patients. Forty-one patients (76%) were successfully ablated with cryoablation, and RF ablation after an unsuccessful cryoablation ablated the SVTs successfully at the same location in 6 patients (11%). Complication occurred in 1 patient (deep vein thrombosis). The cumulative freedom from SVT rate at 30 days after the procedure was 78% and there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate among the SVTs. CONCLUSION: A combined cryo- and RF-catheter ablation is clinically effective in patients undergoing SVT ablation with the potential risk of injury to the normal conduction system.