Ablation Strategies for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: Beyond the Pulmonary Veins.

Despite advances in ablative therapies, outcomes remain less favorable for persistent atrial fibrillation often due to presence of non-pulmonary vein triggers and abnormal atrial substrates. This review highlights advances in ablation technologies and notable scientific literature on clinical outcomes associated with pursuing adjunctive ablation targets and substrate modification during persistent atrial fibrillation ablation, while also highlighting notable future directions.

Clinical impact of cryoballoon posterior wall isolation using the cross-over technique in persistent atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Successful left atrial posterior wall isolation (LAPWI) using only the cryoballoon (CB) is technically challenging for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the cross-over technique, wherein an overlapped ablation is performed by placing the CB from both directions in contact with the LAPW. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective, observational study of 194 consecutive patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PerAF) who underwent a first-time procedure of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) + PWI (108 patients) or PVI-only (86 patients) using the CB. The cross-over technique was applied in all LAPWI. RESULTS: For ablation of the LA roof and bottom, respectively, a mean of 8.6 ± 1.0 (right to left [R→L] 4.3 ± 1.1 and left to right [L→R] 4.3 ± 1.1) and 9.1 ± 1.2 (R→L 4.6 ± 1.6 and L→R 4.5 ± 1.2) CB applications were delivered. LAPW was successfully isolated solely using the CB in 99.1% of patients. Although the PVI + PWI group had significantly longer procedure time, no severe adverse events were observed in either group. During a median follow-up of 19 months, freedom from recurrence of all atrial tachyarrhythmias was achieved in 93.5% of the PVI + PWI group and 72.9% of the PVI-only group (p = .011). CONCLUSIONS: LAPWI performed solely with the CB using the cross-over technique is feasibly, safe, and was independently associated with a significantly higher freedom from recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias compared with PVI alone in patients with PerAF.

Outcomes of hybrid surgical ablation and concomitant left atrial appendage exclusion in long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Management of patients with long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) presents a clinical challenge. Hybrid convergent ablation has been shown to have superior efficacy compared to endocardial-only ablation. However, data on concomitant left atrial appendage (LAA) management along with hybrid ablation is sparse. METHODS: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of concomitant hybrid convergent ablation and LAA clipping in patients with LSPAF. We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients with LSPAF who underwent hybrid surgical ablation with LAA clipping at our institution. The primary endpoint was a recurrence of atrial arrhythmias at 12 months. Further, the durability of surgical left atrial posterior wall ablation was examined during the endocardial catheter ablation using standing electrophysiological criteria. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients were included. Mean age was 63.5 ± 9.6 years, and 71% were males. LAA clipping was performed in 99% of patients. The mean time between the surgical and endocardial stages of the procedure was 2.6 ± 1.7 months. Persistent posterior wall activity was observed in 34.2% (n = 27/79) patients during the endocardial phase of the procedure. Cardiac implantable electronic device was used in 74% of patients for monitoring of recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF). The primary effectiveness of AF freedom at 12 months was 73.8% (45/61). Over a 12-month follow-up period, 11.4% (9/79) of patients required repeat catheter ablation, of which 88.9% (8/9) had evidence of persistent posterior wall activity. CONCLUSION: Concomitant hybrid convergent ablation and LAA exclusion with an atrial clip provides reasonable long-term AF-free survival in patients with LSPAF. Persistent posterior wall activity is seen commonly in patients presenting with recurrent AF following hybrid convergent AF ablation.

High-frequency low-tidal volume ventilation improves procedural and long-term clinical outcomes in persistent atrial fibrillation ablation: Prospective multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: High-frequency, low-tidal volume (HFLTV) ventilation increases the efficacy and efficiency of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Whether those benefits can be extrapolated to RFCA of persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) is undetermined. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether using HFLTV ventilation during RFCA in patients with PeAF is associated with improved procedural and long-term clinical outcomes compared to standard ventilation (SV). METHODS: In this prospective multicenter registry (REAL-AF), patients who had undergone pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) + posterior wall isolation (PWI) for PeAF using either HFLTV ventilation or SV were included. The primary efficacy outcome was freedom from all-atrial arrhythmias at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included procedural and long-term clinical outcomes and complications. RESULTS: A total of 210 patients were included (HFLTV=95 vs. SV=115) in the analysis. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. Procedural time (80 [66-103.5] minutes vs 110 [85-141] minutes; P <.001), total radiofrequency (RF) time (18.73 [13.93-26.53] minutes vs 26.15 [20.30-35.25] minutes; P <.001), and pulmonary vein RF time (11.35 [8.78-16.69] minutes vs 18 [13.74-24.14] minutes; P <.001) were significantly shorter using HFLTV ventilation compared with SV. Freedom from all-atrial arrhythmias was significantly higher with HFLTV ventilation compared with SV (82.1% vs 68.7%; hazard ratio 0.41; 95% confidence interval [0.21-0.82]; P = .012), indicating a 43% relative risk reduction and a 13.4% absolute risk reduction in all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence. There was no difference in long-term procedure-related complications between the groups (HFLTV 1.1% vs SV 0%, P = .270). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing RFCA with PVI + PWI for PeAF, the use of HFLTV ventilation was associated with higher freedom from all-atrial arrhythmias at 12-month follow-up, with significantly shorter procedural and RF times compared to SV, while reporting a similar safety profile.

The Value of Adjunctive Left Atrial Posterior Wall Isolation on Clinical Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Although pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the mainstream way of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. The left atrial posterior wall (LAPW) may contributes to the development of AF as an arrhythmogenic substrate. The efficacy of additional left atrial posterior wall isolation (LAPWI) beyond PVI is in AF patients remains undefined. This study explored the influence of posterior wall isolation (PWI) on clinical outcomes in AF patients. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing the outcomes of AF with and without PWI. The efficacy outcomes were recurrence of all atrial arrhythmia (AA), atrial fibrillation (AF), and atrial flutter (AFL)/atrial tachycardia (AT). The safety outcomes were mainly focused on procedural adverse events. Results: A total of 16 studies (7 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 3 prospective studies and 6 retrospective analyses) with 3340 AF patients were enrolled (1550 patients in PVI with PWI group and 1790 in PVI alone group). 12 studies included persistent atrial fibrillation patients, 3 studies with paroxysmal AF patients and 1 study with paroxysmal AF and persistent AF concurrently. Mean follow-up period was 16.56 months. In AF patients, adjunctive PWI obviously reduced the recurrence of all atrial arrhythmias (risk ratio (RR) 0.78 [95% CI 0.64-0.95], I 2 = 79%, p = 0.01) and the recurrence of AF (RR 0.68 [95% CI 0.53-0.88], I 2 = 75%, p = 0.004); Meanwhile, additional PWI left no impact substantially on lower recurrence of AFL/AT (RR 1.23 [95% CI 0.94-1.60], I 2 = 49%, p = 0.12). The results seemed to be no significant differences in occurrence rate of procedural complications between the PVI only and PWI+PVI (RR 1.19 [95% CI 0.80-1.79], I 2 = 0%, p = 0.39). In subgroup analyses, the benefit of adjunctive PWI compared with PVI only was more distinct in persistent AF group and cryoballoon ablation group. Notably, adjunctive PWI with radiofrequency ablation may induce a slight increase of recurrent AFL/AT compared with PVI only (RR 1.56 [95% CI 1.02-2.39], I 2 = 30%, p = 0.04). Conclusions: Compared with PVI alone, additional PWI to PVI appeared to be associated with decreased recurrence of AF and atrial arrhythmias without an increased occurrence of procedural complications, especially in persistent AF patients. Cryoballoon ablation seemed more suitable for PWI compared with radiofrequency ablation. More RCTs are needed to verify the conclusion.

Successful Left Atrial Posterior Wall Isolation Including Roof Line Ablation Using a Cryoballoon for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation with Dextrocardia and Situs Inversus.

Cryoballoon ablation has been established as an effective method for pulmonary vein isolation and has recently been investigated for its efficacy of substrate modification on the left atrial roof area in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. We herein report the first successful case of left atrial posterior wall isolation including roof line ablation using cryoballoons in a patient with persistent atrial fibrillation, dextrocardia, and situs inversus. Cryoballoon ablation proved to be a safe and straightforward approach to create lasting lesions along the left atrial roof line and left atrial posterior wall, even under challenging anatomical conditions.

Impact of Posterior Wall Isolation During AF Ablation on the Incidence of Left Atrial Flutter.

BACKGROUND: Linear and complex electrogram ablation (LCEA) beyond pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is associated with an increase in left atrial macro-re-entrant tachycardias (LAMTs). Posterior wall isolation (PWI) is increasingly performed to improve AF ablation outcomes. However, the impact of PWI on the incidence of LAMT is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to establish the incidence of LAMT following PVI alone vs PVI + PWI vs PVI + PWI + LCEA. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF or LAMT post-AF ablation between 2008 and 2022 from 4 electrophysiology centers were reviewed with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. RESULTS: In total, 5,619 (4,419 index, 1,100 redo) AF ablation procedures were performed in 4,783 patients (mean age 60.9 ± 10.6 years, 70.7% men). Over a mean follow-up of 6.4 ± 3.8 years, 246 procedures for LAMT were performed in 214 patients at a mean of 2.6 ± 0.6 years post-AF ablation. Perimitral (52.8% of patients), roof-dependent (27.1%), PV gap-related (17.3%), and anterior circuits (8.9%) were most common, with 16.4% demonstrating multiple circuits. The incidence of LAMT was significantly higher following PVI + PWI (6.2%) vs PVI alone (3.0%; P < 0.0001) and following PVI + PWI + LCEA vs PVI + PWI (12.5%; P = 0.019). Conduction gaps in previous ablation lines were responsible for LAMT in 28.4% post-PVI alone, 35.3% post-PVI + PWI (P = 0.386), and 81.8% post-PVI + PWI + LCEA (P < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of LAMT following PVI + PWI is higher than with PVI alone but significantly lower than with more extensive atrial substrate modification. Given a low frequency of LAMT following PWI, empiric mitral isthmus ablation is not justified and may be proarrhythmic.

Pulsed field ablation technology for pulmonary vein and left atrial posterior wall isolation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Limited data exist on pulsed-field ablation (PFA) in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) undergoing left atrial posterior wall isolation (LAPWI). METHODS: The Advanced TecHnologies For SuccEssful AblatioN of AF in Clinical Practice (ATHENA) prospective registry included consecutive patients referred for PeAF catheter ablation at 9 Italian centers, treated with the FARAPULSETM-PFA system. The primary efficacy and safety study endpoints were the acute LAPWI rate, freedom from arrhythmic recurrences and the incidence of major periprocedural complications. Patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone, PWI + LAPWI and redo procedures were compared. RESULTS: Among 249 patients, 21.7% had long-standing PeAF, 79.5% were male; mean age was 63 ± 9 years. LAPWI was performed in 57.6% of cases, with 15.3% being redo procedures. Median skin-to-skin times (PVI-only 68 [60-90] vs. PVI + LAPWI 70 [59-88] mins) did not differ between groups. 45.8% LAPWI cases were approached with a 3D-mapping system, and 37.3% with intracardiac echocardiography. LAPWI was achieved in all patients by means of PFA alone, in 88.8% cases at first pass. LAPWI was validated either by an Ultrahigh-density mapping system or by recording electrical activity + pacing maneuvers. No major complications occurred, while 2.4% minor complications were detected. During a median follow-up of 273 [191-379] days, 41 patients (16.5%) experienced an arrhythmic recurrence after the 90-day blanking period, with a mean time to recurrence of 223 ± 100 days and no differences among ablation strategies. CONCLUSION: LAPWI with PFA demonstrates feasibility, rapidity, and safety in real-world practice, offering a viable alternative for PeAF patients. LAPWI is achievable even with a fluoroscopy-only method and does not significantly extend overall procedural times.

Contemporary catheter ablation of complex atrial tachycardias after prior atrial fibrillation ablation: pulsed field vs. radiofrequency current energy ablation guided by high-density mapping.

AIMS: Catheter ablation (CA) of post-ablation left atrial tachycardias (LATs) can be challenging. So far, pulsed field ablation (PFA) has not been compared to standard point-by-point radiofrequency current (RFC) energy for LAT ablation. To compare efficacy of PFA vs. RFC in patients undergoing CA for LAT. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients undergoing LAT-CA were prospectively enrolled (09/2021-02/2023). After electro-anatomical high-density mapping, ablation with either a pentaspline PFA catheter or RFC was performed. Patients were matched 1:1. Ablation was performed at the assumed critical isthmus site with additional ablation, if necessary. Right atrial tachycardia (RAT) was ablated with RFC. Acute and chronic success were assessed. Fifty-six patients (n = 28 each group, age 70 ± 9 years, 75% male) were enrolled.A total of 77 AT (n = 67 LAT, n = 10 RAT; 77% macroreentries) occurred with n = 32 LAT in the PFA group and n = 35 LAT in the RFC group. Of all LAT, 94% (PFA group) vs. 91% (RFC group) successfully terminated to sinus rhythm or another AT during ablation (P = 1.0). Procedure times were shorter (PFA: 121 ± 41 vs. RFC: 190 ± 44 min, P < 0.0001) and fluoroscopy times longer in the PFA group (PFA: 15 ± 9 vs. RFC: 11 ± 6 min, P = 0.04). There were no major complications. After one-year follow-up, estimated arrhythmia free survival was 63% (PFA group) and 87% (RFC group), [hazard ratio 2.91 (95% CI: 1.11-7.65), P = 0.0473]. CONCLUSION: Pulsed field ablation of post-ablation LAT using a pentaspline catheter is feasible, safe, and faster but less effective compared to standard RFC ablation after one year of follow-up. Future catheter designs and optimization of the electrical field may further improve practicability and efficacy of PFA for LAT.

Posterior left atrial isolation is associated with a lower incidence of atrial tachycardia in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Patients may develop atrial tachycardia (AT) after left atrial (LA) ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: The population consisted of 101 consecutive patients (age = 64.3 ± 8.7 years, 70 males (69%), LA = 4.6 ± 0.8 cm, ejection fraction = 48.5 ± 16%) undergoing their initial procedure for persistent AF. After pulmonary vein isolation, patients either underwent posterior LA isolation (n = 50; study group) or linear ablation at the LA roof with verification of conduction block (n = 51; control group). RESULTS: A repeat procedure was performed in 17 (34%) and 28 (55%) patients in the study and control groups, respectively (p = 0.02). Patients in the study group were less likely to develop AT (9/50 [18%] vs. 18/51 [35%]; p = 0.02), roof-dependent (1/50 [2%] vs. 8/51 [16%]; p = 0.008), and multi-loop AT (6/50 [12%] vs. 14/51 [27%]; p = 0.03) as compared to controls. Among various factors, only posterior LA isolation was associated with a lower likelihood of AT recurrence and roof tachycardia at redo procedure (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.00, p = 0.05, and OR, 0.1, 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.96; p < 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with persistent AF, posterior LA isolation is associated with a lower risk of a redo procedure, roof-dependent macro-reentry, and post-ablation AT in general as compared to controls who only received roof ablation. Posterior LA isolation also obviates the need for pacing maneuvers, and may be a more definitive endpoint than linear ablation at the LA roof.

Sex-specific outcomes after catheter ablation for persistent AF.

BACKGROUND: Sex-specific outcomes after catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) have reported conflicting findings. OBJECTIVE: We examined the impact of female sex on outcomes in patients with persistent AF (PsAF) from the Catheter Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: A Multicentre Randomized Trial of Pulmonary Vein Isolation vs PVI with Posterior Left Atrial Wall Isolation (CAPLA) randomized trial. METHODS: A total of 338 patients with PsAF were randomized to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) or PVI with posterior wall isolation (PWI). The primary outcome was arrhythmia recurrence at 12 months. Clinical and electroanatomical characteristics, arrhythmia recurrence, and quality of life were compared between women and men. RESULTS: Seventy-nine women (23.4%; PVI 37; PVI + PWI 42) and 259 men (76.6%; PVI 131; PVI + PWI 128) underwent AF ablation. Women were older {median age 70.4 (interquartile range [IQR] 64.8-74.6) years vs 64.0 (IQR 56.7-69.7) years; P < .001} and had more advanced left atrial electroanatomical remodeling. At 12 months, arrhythmia-free survival was lower in women (44.3% vs 56.8% in men; hazard ratio 1.44; 95% confidence interval 1.02-2.04; log-rank, P = .036). PWI did not improve arrhythmia-free survival at 12 months (hazard ratio 1.02; 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.40; log-rank, P = .711). The median AF burden was 0% in both groups (women: IQR 0.0%-2.2% vs men: IQR 0.0%-2.8%; P = .804). Health care utilization was comparable between women (36.7%) and men (30.1%) (P = .241); however, women were more likely to undergo a repeat procedure (17.7% vs 6.9%; P = .007). Women reported more severe baseline anxiety (average Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS] anxiety score 7.5 ± 4.9 vs 6.3 ± 4.3 in men; P = .035) and AF-related symptoms (baseline Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality-of-Life Questionnaire [AFEQT] score 46.7 ± 20.7 vs 55.9 ± 23.0 in men; P = .002), with comparable improvements in psychological symptoms (change in HADS anxiety score -3.8 ± 4.6 vs -3.0 ± 4.5; P = .152 (change in HADS depression score -2.9 ± 5.0 vs -2.6 ± 4.0; P = .542) and greater improvement in AFEQT score compared with men at 12 months (change in AFEQT score +45.9 ± 23.1 vs +39.2 ± 24.8; P = .048). CONCLUSION: Women undergoing CA for PsAF report more significant symptoms and poorer quality of life at baseline than men. Despite higher arrhythmia recurrence and repeat procedures in women, the AF burden was comparably low, resulting in significant improvements in quality of life and psychological well-being after CA in both sexes.

Left atrial posterior wall isolation using pulsed-field ablation: procedural characteristics, safety, and mid-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Non-pulmonary vein (PV) ablation targets such as posterior wall isolation (PWI) have been tested in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) offers a novel ablation technology possibly able to overcome the obstacles of incomplete PWI and concerns of damage to adjacent structures compared to thermal energy sources. Our aim was to assess procedural characteristics, safety, and mid-term outcomes of patients undergoing PWI using PFA in a clinical setting. METHODS: Patients undergoing PFA-PVI with PWI were included. First-pass isolation was controlled using a multipolar mapping catheter. RESULTS: One hundred consecutive patients were included (median age 69 [IQR 63-75] years, 33 females (33%), left atrial size 43 [IQR 39-47] mm, paroxysmal AF 24%). Median procedure time was 66 (IQR 59-77) min, and fluoroscopy time was 11 (8-14) min. PWI using PFA was achieved in 100% of patients with a median of 19 applications (IQR 14-26). There were no major complications. Overall, in 15 patients (15%), recurrent AF/AT was noted during a median follow-up of 144 (94-279) days. CONCLUSIONS: PWI using PFA appears safe and results in high acute isolation rates and high arrhythmia survival during mid-term follow-up. Further randomized trials are essential and warranted.

Box Lesion Isolation of the Left Atrial Posterior Wall with Radiofrequency Ablation Restricted in Predetermined Lines for the Treatment of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: The Prognostic Role of Acute Interventional Outcome and Trigger Identification.

The left atrial posterior wall (PW) is known to be a critical substrate for the initiation and perpetuation of atrial fibrillation (AF) and has been explored as a target for catheter ablation, particularly in persistent AF (PerAF). In this retrospective study, we investigate the clinical outcome of patients with PerAF who underwent PW isolation (PWI) restricted in predetermined lines in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). One hundred consecutive patients (64 ± 9.1 years, 66% male, 20% with previous PVI ablation) underwent PWI in a box lesion setting for PerAF lasting >3 months (34% long-standing PerAF). PW triggers were defined as either foci from the PW that repeatedly induced AF or as isolated AF or atrial tachycardia (AT) within the PW. After a mean follow-up period of 25.6 ± 6.7 months, 61% of the patients remained in sinus rhythm after the last procedure. In 79 patients, the PW was successfully isolated, while, in 21 patients, complete isolation was not possible due to failure in completion of the roof line (n = 16), the floor line (n = 7), or both (n = 2). Patients with incomplete isolation had similar AF/AT recurrence rates compared to those with complete PWI. In 12 patients, PW triggers were identified, and PWI in these patients was shown to have a significantly better prognosis in terms of sinus rhythm maintenance (P = .031). Failure of complete PWI does not predispose a patient to an inferior outcome nor is it responsible for iatrogenic ATs. The presence of AF triggers within the PW leads to a particularly favorable result after box lesion isolation.

Left Atrial Posterior Wall Isolation with Pulsed Field Ablation in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial posterior wall isolation (LAPWI) may improve rhythm control in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in persistent atrial fibrillation (persAF) patients undergoing catheter ablation (CA). However, LAPWI may be challenging when using thermal energy sources. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of LAPWI performed by non-thermal pulsed field ablation (PFA) in CA for persAF. METHODS: Consecutive persAF patients from two German centers were prospectively enrolled. There were two study cohorts: (1) the LAPWI cohort, which included PFA-guided (re-)PVI with LAPWI for first-time and/or repeat ablation procedures; and (2) a comparative persAF cohort with a PFA PVI-only approach without LAPWI for first-time ablation within the same timeframe. Patients were followed up by routine Holter ECGs. RESULTS: In total, 79 persistent AF patients were included in the study: 59/79 patients were enrolled in the LAPWI cohort, including 16/59 index (27%) and 43/59 repeat ablation procedures (73%). Sixteen patients (16/79; 21%) were in the PVI-only cohort without LAPWI. Of the patients treated with LAPWI, procedure time and fluoroscopy time was 91 ± 30 min and 15 ± 7 min, respectively. The acute PVI rate was 100% in all first-time ablation patients (32 patients (16 PVI only, 16 PVI plus LAPWI), 196/196 PVs). Of the 43 re-do patients in the LAPWI cohort, re-PVI was necessary in 33% (14/43) of patients (27 PVs; 1.9 PV per-patient); in 67% (29/43), all PVs were isolated, and antral ablation of the PV ostia was performed in 48% (14/29). LAPWI was performed successfully in all 59 (100%) patients of the LAPWI cohort. Two minor complications occurred. No esophageal lesion was detected in the LAPWI cohort (n = 33/59 (56%) patients underwent endoscopy). After 354 ± 197 days of follow-up, freedom from atrial arrhythmias was 79.3% (95-CI: 62-95%) in the complete LAPWI cohort (n = 14/59 (24%) on AAD: class Ic n = 9, class III n = 5). There was no difference regarding acute procedural and clinical outcome compared to the PVI-only cohort. CONCLUSION: LAPWI guided by PFA is feasible and safe in patients undergoing CA for persAF and shows favorable outcomes. In the context of durable PVI, PFA-guided LAPWI may be an effective adjunctive treatment option.

Catheter ablation using pulmonary vein isolation with versus without left atrial posterior wall isolation for persistent atrial fibrillation: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the cornerstone of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF); however, the results are suboptimal for persistent AF. The left atrial posterior wall (LAPW) is thought to be a major additional area in initiation and perpetuation of persistent AF. Therefore, adjunctive ablation of the posterior wall may reduce AF recurrence in patients with persistent AF. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of catheter ablation in patients with persistent AF using PVI alone versus a combination of PVI and LAPW isolation. METHODS: Literature search was conducted in PubMed, PubMed Central, Scopus, and Embase since inception to February 2023. Screening of studies was done via Covidence software. Risk of bias assessment was done using appropriate tools. Data extraction and a narrative synthesis were carried out accordingly. RESULTS: Ten studies were included, of which five were randomized controlled trials. PVI with LAPW ablation group had significantly lower recurrence of overall atrial tachyarrhythmia (OR 0.47, CI 0.32-0.70) and AF (OR 0.39, CI 0.23-0.69). In sensitivity analysis, freedom from atrial arrhythmias was noted to be significantly higher in the PVI with LAPW ablation group (OR 2.22, CI 1.36-3.64). However, there was no significant difference in occurrence of atrial flutter (OR 1.36, CI 0.86-2.14) or with periprocedural adverse events (OR 1.10, CI 0.60-1.99). CONCLUSION: LAPW ablation, in addition to PVI, significantly improves the rates of arrhythmia freedom and reduces the recurrence of overall atrial tachyarrhythmia. There was no significant difference in atrial flutter or periprocedural adverse events.

Impact of Posterior Left Atrial Voltage on Ablation Outcomes in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: CAPLA Substudy.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is less effective in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PsAF). Adjunctive ablation targeting low voltage areas (LVAs) may improve arrhythmia outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the outcomes of adding posterior wall isolation (PWI) to PVI, vs PVI alone in PsAF patients with posterior wall LVAs. METHODS: The CAPLA (Effect of Catheter Ablation Using Pulmonary Vein Isolation With vs Without Posterior Left Atrial Wall Isolation on Atrial Arrhythmia Recurrence in Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation) study was a multicenter, randomized trial involving PsAF patients randomized 1:1 to either PVI alone or PVI with PWI. Voltage mapping performed during pacing pre-ablation was reviewed offline, with LVA defined as bipolar voltage of <0.5 mV. The primary endpoint was freedom from any documented atrial arrhythmia of >30 seconds off antiarrhythmic medication at 12 months after a single ablation procedure in patients with posterior LVA. RESULTS: A total of 210 patients (average 64.6 ± 9.2 years,73.3% males, median atrial fibrillation duration 4.5 months [IQR: 2 to 8 months]) underwent multipolar left atrial mapping during coronary sinus pacing with posterior LVA present in 69 (32.9%). Patients with posterior LVA were more likely to have LVA in other atrial regions (91.7% vs 57.1%; P < 0.01), larger left atrial diameter (4.8 cm vs 4.4 cm; P < 0.01), and significantly increased risk of atrial arrhythmia recurrence at 12 months (LVA: 56.5% vs no LVA: 41.4%; HR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.01-2.27; P = 0.04) compared to no posterior LVA. However, the addition of PWI to PVI did not significantly improve freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence over PVI alone (PVI with PWI: 44.8% vs PVI: 41.9%; HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.51-1.79; P = 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PsAF undergoing catheter ablation, posterior LVA was associated with a significant increase in atrial arrhythmia recurrence. However, the addition of PWI in those with posterior LVA did not reduce atrial arrhythmia recurrence over PVI alone.