Early ablation of newly diagnosed paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (NEWPaAF) versus newly diagnosed persistent atrial fibrillation (NEWPeAF): Comparison of patient populations and ablation outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about very early atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation after first AF detection. METHODS: We evaluated patients with AF ablation <4 months from newly diagnosed paroxysmal AF (NEWPaAF) and newly diagnosed persistent AF (NEWPeAF). We compared the two patient populations and compared ablation outcomes to those undergoing later ablation. RESULTS: Ablation was done <4 months from AF diagnosis in 353 patients (135 = paroxysmal, 218 = persistent). Early ablation outcome was best for NEWPaAF versus NEWPeAF for initial (p = 0.030) but not final (p = 0.102) ablation. Despite recent AF diagnosis in both groups, they were clinically quite different. NEWPaAF patients were younger (64.3 ± 13.0 vs. 67.3 ± 10.9, p = 0.0020), failed fewer drugs (0.39 vs. 0.60, p = 0.007), had smaller LA size (4.12 ± 0.58 vs. 4.48 ± 0.59 cm, p < 0.0001), lower BMI (28.8 ± 5.0 vs. 30.3 ± 6.0, p = 0.016), and less CAD (3.7% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.007), cardiomyopathies (2.2% vs. 22.9%, p = 0.0001), hypertension (46.7% vs. 67.4%, p < 0.0001), diabetes (8.1% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.011) and sleep apnea (20.0% vs. 30.3%, p = 0.031). For NEWPaAF, early ablation AF-free outcome was no better than later ablation (p = 0.314). For NEWPeAF, AF-free outcomes were better for early ablation than later ablation (p < 0.0001). Delaying ablation allowed more strokes/TIAs in both AF types (paroxysmal p = 0.014, persistent p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients presenting for early ablation after newly diagnosed persistent AF have more pre-existing comorbidities and worse initial ablation outcomes than patients with NEWPaAF. For NEWPaAF, there was no advantage to early ablation, as long as the AF remained paroxysmal. For NEWPeAF, early ablation gave better outcomes than later ablation and they should undergo early ablation. For both AF types, waiting was associated with more neurologic events, suggesting all patients should consider earlier ablation.

Very long term outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablation.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the very long term durability of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate very long term AF ablation outcomes. METHODS: We followed 5200 patients undergoing 7145 ablation procedures. We evaluated outcomes after single and multiple ablation procedures for paroxysmal (PAF; 33.6%), persistent (PeAF; 56.4%), and long-standing (LsAF; 9.9%) AF. We compared 3 ablation eras by initial ablation catheter: early (101 patients) using solid big tip (SBT) catheters (October 2003 to December 2005), intermediate (2143 patients) using open irrigated tip (OIT) catheters (December 2005 to August 2016), and contemporary (2956 patients) using contact force (CF) catheters (March 2014 to December 2021). RESULTS: AF freedom at 5, 10, and 15 years was as follows: initial ablation: PAF 67.8%, 56.3%, 47.6%; PeAF 46.6%, 35.6%, 26.5%; and LsAF 30.4%, 18.0%, 3.4%; final ablation: PAF 80.3%, 72.6%, 62.5%; PeAF 60.1%, 50.2%, 42.5%; and LsAF 43.4%, 32.0%, 20.6%. For PAF and PeAF, CF ablation procedures were better than OIT ablation procedures (P < .0001) and both were better than SBT ablation procedures (P < .001). LsAF had no outcome improvement over the eras. The 8-year success rate after final ablation for CF, OIT, and SBT catheter eras was as follows: PAF 79.1%, 71.8%, 60.0%; PeAF 55.9%, 50.7%, 38.0%; and LsAF 42.7%, 36.2%, 31.8%. Highest AF recurrence was in the first 2 years, with a 2- to 15-year recurrence of 2%/yr. Success predictors after initial and final ablation procedures were younger age, smaller left atrium, shorter AF duration, male sex, less persistent AF, lower CHA2DS2-VASc score, fewer drugs failed, and more recent catheter era. CONCLUSION: After year 2, there is 2%/yr recurrence rate for all AF types. Ablation success is best in the CF catheter era, intermediate in the OIT era, and worst in the SBT era. Over the ablation eras, outcomes improved for PAF and PeAF but not for LsAF. We should follow patients indefinitely after ablation. We need an understanding of how to better ablate more persistent AF.