High incidence of newly diagnosed obstructive coronary artery disease regardless of chest pain detected on pre-procedural cardiac computed tomography angiography in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac computed tomography (CT) is often performed before catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation to map atrial and pulmonary anatomy. Incident coronary artery disease (CAD) may also be diagnosed during cardiac CT angiography (CTA). Our aim was to assess whether coronary CTA might be able to identify a significant proportion of patients with obstructive CAD prior to their catheter ablation procedure event, even in asymptomatic patients. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing pre-ablation coronary CTA for atrial fibrillation between 2013 and 2020 were retrospectively selected. Patients with previously diagnosed CAD were excluded. Obstructive CAD was defined as ≥50% luminal stenosis. We analyzed the relationship between obstructive CAD, any chest pain, and traditional risk factors. RESULTS: Overall, 2321 patients [median age 63.0 (54.4-69.2), 1052/2321 (45.3%) female] underwent coronary CTA and 488/2321 (21.0%) were diagnosed with obstructive CAD. There was no difference regarding the rate of obstructive CAD in patients with any chest pain compared to patients without any chest pain [91/404 (22.5%) vs. 397/1917 (20.7%), P = 0.416, respectively). The following parameters were associated with obstructive CAD: age > 65 years [odds ratio (OR) = 2.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.02-3.13; P < 0.001), male sex (OR = 1.59; 95% CI, 1.28-1.98; P < 0.001), hypertension (OR = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.08-1.81; P = 0.012), diabetes (OR = 1.50; 95% CI, 1.13-1.99; P = 0.006), dyslipidaemia (OR = 1.33; 95% CI, 1.07-1.66; P = 0.011) and history of smoking (OR = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.07-1.68; P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence of obstructive CAD even in patients without chest pain highlights the importance of additional coronary artery diagnostics in patients undergoing left atrial CTA awaiting catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. These patients regardless of chest pain thus may require further risk modification to decrease their potential ischemic and thromboembolic risk.

Impact of High-Power and Very High-Power Short-Duration Radiofrequency Ablation on Procedure Characteristics and First-Pass Isolation During Pulmonary Vein Isolation.

Introduction: High-power short-duration (HPSD) radiofrequency ablation has been proposed to produce rapid and effective lesions for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). We aimed to evaluate the procedural characteristics and the first-pass isolation (FPI) rate of HPSD and very high-power short-duration (vHPSD) ablation compared to the low-power long-duration (LPLD) ablation technique. Methods: One hundred fifty-six patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) were enrolled and assigned to LPLD, HPSD, or vHPSD PVI. The energy setting was 30, 50, and 90 W in the LPLD, HPSD, and vHPSD groups, respectively. In the vHPSD group, 90 W/4 s energy delivery was used in the QMODE+ setting. In the other groups, ablation index-guided applications were delivered with 30 W (LPLD) or 50 W (HPSD). Results: Bilateral PVI was achieved in all cases. Compared to the LPLD group, the HPSD and vHPSD groups had shorter procedure time [85 (75-101) min, 79 (65-91) min, and 70 (53-83) min], left atrial dwelling time [61 (55-70) min, 53 (41-56) min, and 45 (34-52) min], total RF time [1,567 (1,366-1,761) s, 1,398 (1,021-1,711) s, and 336 (247-386) s], but higher bilateral FPI rate (57, 78, and 80%) (all p-values < 0.01). The use of HPSD (OR = 2.72, 95% CI 1.15-6.44, p = 0.023) and vHPSD (OR = 2.90, 95% CI 1.24-6.44, p = 0.014) ablation techniques were associated with a higher probability of bilateral FPI. The 9-month AF-recurrence rate was lower in case of HPSD and vHPSD compared to LPLD ablation (10, 8, and 36%, p = 0.0001). Moreover, the presence of FPI was associated with a lower AF-recurrence rate at 9-month (OR = 0.09, 95% CI 0.04-0.24, p = 0.0001). Conclusion: Our prospective, observational cohort study showed that both HPSD and vHPSD RF ablation shortens procedure and RF time and results in a higher rate of FPI compared to LPLD ablation. Moreover, the use of HPSD and vHPSD ablation increased the acute and mid-term success rate. No safety concerns were raised for HPSD or vHPSD ablation in our study.