Safety and Effectiveness of Pulsed Field Ablation to Treat Atrial Fibrillation: One-Year Outcomes From the MANIFEST-PF Registry.

BACKGROUND: Pulsed field ablation is a novel nonthermal cardiac ablation modality using ultra-rapid electrical pulses to cause cell death by a mechanism of irreversible electroporation. Unlike the traditional ablation energy sources, pulsed field ablation has demonstrated significant preferentiality to myocardial tissue ablation, and thus avoids certain thermally mediated complications. However, its safety and effectiveness remain unknown in usual clinical care. METHODS: MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-Approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) is a retrospective, multinational, patient-level registry wherein patients at each center were prospectively included in their respective center registries. The registry included all patients undergoing postapproval treatment with a multielectrode 5-spline pulsed field ablation catheter to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) between March 1, 2021, and May 30, 2022. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinical documented atrial arrhythmia (AF/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia) of ≥30 seconds on the basis of electrocardiographic data after a 3-month blanking period (on or off antiarrhythmic drugs). Safety outcomes included the composite of acute (<7 days postprocedure) and latent (>7 days) major adverse events. RESULTS: At 24 European centers (77 operators) pulsed field ablation was performed in 1568 patients with AF: age 64.5±11.5 years, female 35%, paroxysmal/persistent AF 65%/32%, CHA2DS2-VASc 2.2±1.6, median left ventricular ejection fraction 60%, and left atrial diameter 42 mm. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 99.2% of patients. After a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 367 (289-421) days, the 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was 78.1% (95% CI, 76.0%-80.0%); clinical effectiveness was more common in patients with paroxysmal AF versus persistent AF (81.6% versus 71.5%; P=0.001). Acute major adverse events occurred in 1.9% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this large observational registry of the postapproval clinical use of pulsed field technology to treat AF, catheter ablation using pulsed field energy was clinically effective in 78% of patients with AF.

Current management of atrial fibrillation in routine practice according to the last ESC guidelines: an EHRA physician survey-how are we dealing with controversial approaches?

AIMS: Although guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) are regularly published, many controversial issues remain, limiting their implementation. We aim to describe current clinical practice among European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) community according to last guidelines. METHODS AND RESULTS: A 30 multiple-choice questionnaire covering the most controversial topics related to AF management was distributed through the EHRA Research Network, National Societies, and social media between January and February 2023. One hundred and eighty-one physicians responded the survey, 61% from university hospitals. Atrial fibrillation screening in high-risk patients is regularly performed by 57%. Only 42% has access to at least one programme aiming at diagnosing/managing comorbidities and lifestyle modifications, with marked heterogeneity between countries. Direct oral anticoagulants are the preferred antithrombotic (97%). Rhythm control is the preferred strategy in most AF phenotypes: symptomatic vs. asymptomatic paroxysmal AF (97% vs. 77%), low vs. high risk for recurrence persistent AF (90% vs. 72%), and permanent AF (20%). I-C drugs and amiodarone are preferred while dronedarone and sotalol barely used. Ablation is the first-line therapy for symptomatic paroxysmal AF (69%) and persistent AF with markers of atrial disease (57%) and is performed independently of symptoms by 15%. In persistent AF, 68% performs only pulmonary vein isolation and 32% also additional lesions. CONCLUSION: There is marked heterogeneity in AF management and limited accordance to last guidelines in the EHRA community. Most of the discrepancies are related to the main controversial issues, such as those related to AF screening, management of comorbidities, pharmacological treatment, and ablation strategy.

Management of ventricular tachycardias: insights on centre settings, procedural workflow, endpoints, and implementation of guidelines-results from an EHRA survey.

Ventricular tachycardia (VT), and its occurrence, is still one of the main reasons for sudden cardiac death and, therefore, for increased mortality and morbidity foremost in patients with structural heart [Kahle A-K, Jungen C, Alken F-A, Scherschel K, Willems S, Pürerfellner H et al. Management of ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy: contemporary armamentarium. Europace 2022;24:538-51]. Catheter ablation has become a safe and effective treatment option in patients with recurrent VT [Cronin EM, Bogun FM, Maury P, Peichl P, Chen M, Namboodiri N et al. 2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias. Heart Rhythm 2020;17:e2-154]. Previous and current guidelines provide guidance on indication for VT ablation and risk assessment and evaluation of underlying disease. However, no uniform recommendation is provided regarding procedural strategies, timing of ablation, and centre setting. Therefore, these specifics seem to differ largely, and recent data are sparse. This physician-based European Heart Rhythm Association survey aims to deliver insights on not only infrastructural settings but also procedural specifics, applied technologies, ablation strategies, and procedural endpoints. Therefore, these findings might deliver a real-world scenario of VT management and potentially are of guidance for other centres.

Incidence, implications, and management of sense-B-noise failure in subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator patients: insights from a large multicentre registry.

AIMS: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) offer potentially distinct advantages over transvenous defibrillator systems. Recent randomized trials showed significantly lower lead failure rates than transvenous ICD. Still, S-ICDs remain associated with the risk of inappropriate shocks (IAS). While previous studies have reported varying causes of IAS, this study explores a rare cause of IAS, referred to as 'sense-B-noise.' It was recently described in case series, but its incidence has not been studied in a large cohort of S-ICD patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed data from patients implanted with S-ICD models 1010, A209, and A219 between October 2009 and July 2023 across nine centres in Europe and the USA. The analysis concentrated on determining the incidence and understanding the implications of sense-B-noise events. Sense-B-noise represents a rare manifestation of distinct electrogram abnormalities within the primary and alternate sensing vectors. Data were collected from medical records, device telemetry, and manufacturer reports for investigation. This registry is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05713708). Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator devices of the 1158 patients were analysed. The median follow-up time for all patients was 46 (IQR 23-64) months. In 107 patients (9.2%) ≥1 IAS was observed during follow-up. Sense-B-noise failure was diagnosed in six (0.5 and 5.6% of all IAS) patients, in all patients, the diagnosis was made after an IAS episode. Median lead dwell time in the affected patients was 23 (2-70) months. To resolve the sense-B-noise defect, in three patients reprogramming to the secondary vector was undertaken, and two patients underwent system removal with subsequent S-ICD reimplantation due to low amplitude in the secondary vector. In one patient, the secondary vector was initially programmed, and subsequently, an S-ICD system exchange was performed due to T-wave-oversensing IAS episodes. CONCLUSION: This multicentre analysis' findings shed light on a rare but clinically highly significant adverse event in S-ICD therapy. To our knowledge, we provide the first systematic multicentre analysis investigating the incidence of sense-B-noise. Due to being difficult to diagnose and limited options for resolution, management of sense-B-noise is challenging. Complete system exchange may be the only option for some patients. Educating healthcare providers involved in S-ICD patient care is crucial for ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective management of sense-B-noise issues.

Occurrence of premature battery depletion in a large multicentre registry of subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator patients.

AIMS: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) have become established in preventing sudden cardiac death, with some advantages over transvenous defibrillator systems, including a lower incidence of lead failures. Despite technological advancements, S-ICD carriers may suffer from significant complications, such as premature battery depletion (PBD), that led to an advisory for nearly 40 000 patients. This multicentre study evaluated the incidence of PBD in a large set of S-ICD patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from patients implanted with S-ICD models A209 and A219 between October 2012 and July 2023 across nine centres in Europe and the USA were reviewed. Incidence and implications of PBD, defined as clinically observed sudden drop in battery longevity, were analysed and compared to PBD with the definition of battery depletion within 60 months. Prospectively collected clinical data were obtained retrospectively from medical records, device telemetry, and manufacturer reports. This registry is listed on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05713708). Of the 1112 S-ICD devices analysed, 547 (49.2%) were equipped with a potentially affected capacitor linked to PBD occurrence, currently under Food and Drug Administration advisory. The median follow-up time for all patients was 46 [inter-quartile range (IQR) 24-63] months. Clinically suspected PBD was observed in 159 (29.1%) of cases, with a median time to generator removal or replacement of 65 (IQR 55-72) months, indicative of significant deviations from expected battery lifespan. Manufacturer confirmation of PBD was made in 91.7% of devices returned for analysis. No cases of PBD were observed in devices that were not under advisory. CONCLUSION: This manufacturer-independent analysis highlights a notable incidence of PBD in patients equipped with S-ICD models under advisory, and the rate of PBD in this study corresponds to the rate currently estimated by the manufacturer. To the best of our knowledge, this provides the largest contemporary peer-reviewed study cohort investigating the actual incidence of PBD in S-ICD patients. These findings emphasize the importance of post-market registries in collaboration between clinicians and the manufacturer to optimize safety and efficacy in S-ICD treatment.

Comparison of pulsed field ablation and cryoballoon ablation for pulmonary vein isolation.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the cornerstone in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). PVI using cryoballoon (CB) technology has emerged as a standard procedure in many centers. Recently, pulsed field ablation (PFA) has been introduced and used to achieve PVI. First data show high acute and favorable long-term outcomes. So far, data comparing these new "single shot" devices are sparse. We sought to compare procedural and outcome data for first time PFA users versus CB in patients undergoing de novo PVI. Furthermore, potentially postprocedural discomfort and affection of autonomic ganglia were assessed. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective analysis and comparison of all de novo PVIs with PFA and CB was performed. Furthermore, PFA PVI learning curve was evaluated. During follow-up, repeat outpatient visits and Holter electrocardiogram were performed to analyze arrhythmia-free survival. Discomfort analysis was obtained by prescribed analgesic medication within first 48 h after PVI. Potential changes in heart rate (HR) between baseline and at 3-month follow-up were evaluated. A total of 108 patients (54 PFA and 54 CB; PFA; 33 (30%) female) with paroxysmal and persistent AF were analyzed. Type of AF was comparable (Patients suffering from PAF: PFA: 16 (30%), CB: 17 (31%), p = 1.0). In 107 (99%) patients, successful PVI was achieved. Transient phrenic palsy omitted complete PVI in one CB patient. A trend for a shorter overall procedure duration was observed in the PFA group (PFA: 64.5 ± 17.5 min; CB: 73.0 ± 24.8 min; p = 0.07). Excluding LA mapping time (first 14 cases), procedure time was significantly shorter using PFA (PFA: 58.0 ± 12.5 min, CB: 73.0 ± 24.8 min, p = 0.0001). Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer for PFA (PFA: 15.3 ± 4.7 min, CB: 12.3 ± 5.3 min; p = 0.001), but significantly less contrast medium was used (PFA: 12 ± 6 mL; CB: 51 ± 29 mL, p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis of the PFA group revealed a significant shortening of procedure duration over time (first tertile: 72.7 ± 13.5 min, second tertile: 67.3 ± 21.7 min, third tertile: 53.4 ± 9.8 min, first vs. third tertile p < 0.0001). Two cardiac tamponades occurred in the PFA group (p = 0.495), of which one was most likely related to complex transseptal puncture. In the first 48 h after PVI, the number of prescribed analgesics due to postprocedural pain was equal between both groups (PFA: 7 (13%) patients, CB: 10 (19%) patients, p = 0.598). After a FU of 273 ± 129 days, 35 of 47 patients (74%) after PFA and 36 of 50 patients (72%) after CB PVI were free of any atrial arrhythmia (HR: 0.98, p = 0.88). Only in the PFA group, a significant increase in HR 3 months after PVI was observed (pre-PVI: 61 ± 8 beats/min, post-PVI: 65 ± 9 beats/min, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: The new PFA technology is equally effective and safe as compared to CB for complete PVI with potentially shorter procedure time and significantly less contrast medium. However, AF recurrence rates after PFA PVI seem to be comparable to CB PVI.

Comparison of pulsed-field ablation versus very high power short duration-ablation for pulmonary vein isolation.

BACKGROUND: The newly introduced nonthermal pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a promising technology to achieve fast pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with high acute success rates and good safety features. However, previous studies have shown that very high power short duration ablation (VHPSD) is also highly effective and fast to achieve PVI with potentially less arrhythmia recurrence compared to conventional radiofrequency ablation. Data comparing PFA to VHPSD-PVI is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study compared procedural and outcome data for PFA-PVI to VHPSD-PVI in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (PAF/persAF). METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing de novo PVI (PFA or VHPSD) were included in this analysis. For PFA-PVI a pentaspline 20 electrode catheter was used. For VHPSD-PVI an enhanced irrigated catheter with a power setting of 70 W/7 s (70 W/5 s at posterior wall) was employed in conjunction with electro-anatomical mapping. All procedures were performed in deep analgo-sedation. RESULTS: A total of n = 114 patients (n = 57[50%] PFA, n = 17[30%] PAF; n = 40[70%] persAF) were included in this analysis. PVI was successful in all patients. The PFA group revealed a significantly shorter procedure duration (65 ± 17 min vs. 95 ± 23 min, p < 0.01) but longer fluoroscopy time (PFA 15 ± 5 min and VHPSD 12 ± 3 min; p < 0.001). At follow-up after median 125 days (interquartile range: 109-162) n = 46 PFA (80.7%) and n = 44 VHPSD pts (77.2%) were free from atrial arrhythmia after a single procedure (p = 0.819). Two tamponades occurred in the PFA while in VHPSD two pts suffered groin bleedings. One clinically nonsignificant PV stenosis occurred in the VHPSD group. CONCLUSION: Pulsed-field ablation and VHPSD-PVI seem to be highly effective and safe to achieve PVI in the setting of PAF and persAF with comparable arrhythmia-free survival. However, procedure duration for PFA PVI is significantly shorter and therefore may be of potential benefit. Compared to PFA VHPSD-PVI might ensure information on left atrial substrate allowing to target concomitant secondary tachycardias.

Prevention and treatment of pericardial tamponade in the electrophysiology laboratory: a European Heart Rhythm Association survey.

AIMS: Pericardial tamponade (PT) is the most frequent severe complication during electrophysiology (EP) procedures and requires immediate, co-ordinated, and effective treatment. However, multiple aspects of PT treatment are either not standardized or are under ongoing debate. METHODS AND RESULTS: An online questionnaire consisting of 26 multiple-choice questions was sent out to the European Heart Rhythm (EHRA) Research Network and also distributed via social media outputs. The EHRA survey was conducted between May and June 2023. A total of 213 replies were received from European (87%) and non-European countries. Ninety per cent of all participants perform interventions in dedicated EP labs equipped with different ablation platforms. In case of PT, most participants use X-ray as the main imaging modality guiding pericardial puncture, predominantly aiming for an anterior puncture site. Sheaths of different sizes are introduced into the pericardial space (84.3%), followed by a pigtail catheter. Application of protamine is an established but variable step in the majority (84.6%). Novel oral anticoagulants (NOAC) antidotes are not used by 73.3% of participants, while 15.2% routinely apply them. Re-transfusion of aspirated blood is performed by 72.1% [before protamine administration (18.2%), after protamine administration (13.5%), if pericardial effusion cannot be controlled (40.4%)]. A total of 72.4% re-transfuse without blood filter systems. A decision for surgical intervention is mostly taken if bleeding continues despite all interventional measures. CONCLUSION: The current survey demonstrates that the management of PT is heterogeneous among centres. The findings of this survey may help to guide operators in their treatment and decisions in the setting of PT.

Implementation and first outcomes of a novel standard operating procedure for preprocedural transoesophageal echocardiography screening in course of atrial arrhythmia ablation.

AIMS: Preprocedural transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) screening for left atrial (LA) thrombi is the standard of care in many centres performing atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. However, TEE imposes procedural risks for patients and is often challenging to implement in daily practice, besides causing patient discomfort. At our centre, a novel standard operating procedure (SOP) was implemented, aiming to identify patients that can be exempt from TEE screening. We aimed to assess whether this screening approach may reduce preprocedural TEEs without imposing patients of higher risks for cerebrovascular events (CVEs). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data of 1874 consecutive patients treated by catheter ablation of LA arrhythmias between 2018 and 2022 were retrospectively analysed. A cohort of 937 patients, where decision to perform TEE screening was based on a new SOP (considering rhythm at admission, CHA2DS2-VASc score, and sufficient anticoagulation), was compared to a matched cohort receiving TEE before every procedure. Number of performed TEEs and incidences of CVEs were compared. Implementation of the new SOP led to a 67% reduction in TEEs performed (old SOP: 933 vs. new SOP: 305). No significant differences between the groups were detected regarding transitory ischaemic attack (old SOP: 5 vs. new SOP: 3; P = 0.48) and stroke (no events). No solid thrombi were detected during TEE screening. CONCLUSION: The number of preprocedural screening TEEs before AF ablation procedures can be safely reduced by applying risk stratification based on rhythm at admission and CHA2DS2-VASc score, if anticoagulation was performed properly.

Treatment of pathophysiologic propagation outside of the pulmonary veins in retreatment of atrial fibrillation patients: RECOVER AF study.

AIMS: RECOVER AF evaluated the performance of whole-chamber non-contact charge-density mapping to guide the ablation of non-pulmonary vein (PV) targets in persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) patients following either a first or second failed procedure. METHODS AND RESULTS: RECOVER AF was a prospective, non-randomized trial that enrolled patients scheduled for a first or second ablation retreatment for recurrent AF. The PVs were assessed and re-isolated if necessary. The AF maps were used to guide the ablation of non-PV targets through elimination of pathologic conduction patterns (PCPs). Primary endpoint was freedom from AF on or off antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) at 12 months. Patients undergoing retreatment with the AcQMap System (n = 103) were 76% AF-free at 12 months [67% after single procedure (SP)] on or off AADs (80% free from AF on AADs). Patients who had only received a pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) prior to study treatment of non-PV targets with the AcQMap System were 91% AF-free at 12 months (83% SP). No major adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Non-contact mapping can be used to target and guide the ablation of PCPs beyond the PVs in persistent AF patients returning for a first or second retreatment with 76% freedom from AF at 12 months. The AF freedom was particularly high, 91% (43/47), for patients enrolled having only a prior de novo PVI, and freedom from all atrial arrhythmias for this cohort was 74% (35/47). These early results are encouraging and suggest that guiding individualized targeted ablation of PCPs may therefore be advantageous to target at the earliest opportunity in patients with persistent AF.

Multi-national survey on the methods, efficacy, and safety on the post-approval clinical use of pulsed field ablation (MANIFEST-PF).

AIMS: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation modality that has demonstrated preferential tissue ablation, including no oesophageal damage, in first-in-human clinical trials. In the MANIFEST-PF survey, we investigated the 'real world' performance of the only approved PFA catheter, including acute effectiveness and safety-in particular, rare oesophageal effects and other unforeseen PFA-related complications. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective survey included all 24 clinical centres using the pentaspline PFA catheter after regulatory approval. Institution-level data were obtained on patient characteristics, procedure parameters, acute efficacy, and adverse events. With an average of 73 patients treated per centre (range 7-291), full cohort included 1758 patients: mean age 61.6 years (range 19-92), female 34%, first-time ablation 94%, paroxysmal/persistent AF 58/35%. Most procedures employed deep sedation without intubation (82.1%), and 15.1% were discharged same day. Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was successful in 99.9% (range 98.9-100%). Procedure time was 65 min (38-215). There were no oesophageal complications or phrenic nerve injuries persisting past hospital discharge. Major complications (1.6%) were pericardial tamponade (0.97%) and stroke (0.4%); one stroke resulted in death (0.06%). Minor complications (3.9%) were primarily vascular (3.3%), but also included transient phrenic nerve paresis (0.46%), and TIA (0.11%). Rare complications included coronary artery spasm, haemoptysis, and dry cough persistent for 6 weeks (0.06% each). CONCLUSION: In a large cohort of unselected patients, PFA was efficacious for PVI, and expressed a safety profile consistent with preferential tissue ablation. However, the frequency of 'generic' catheter complications (tamponade, stroke) underscores the need for improvement.

Preventive or Deferred Ablation of Ventricular Tachycardia in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy and Implantable Defibrillator (BERLIN VT): A Multicenter Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT) reduces the recurrence of VT in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). The appropriate timing of VT ablation and its effects on mortality and heart failure progression remain a matter of debate. In patients with life-threatening arrhythmias necessitating ICD implantation, we compared outcomes of preventive VT ablation (undertaken before ICD implantation to prevent ICD shocks for VT) and deferred ablation after 3 ICD shocks for VT. METHODS: The BERLIN VT study (Preventive Ablation of Ventricular Tachycardia in Patients With Myocardial Infarction) was a prospective, open, parallel, randomized trial performed at 26 centers. Patients with stable ischemic cardiomyopathy, a left ventricular ejection fraction between 30% and 50%, and documented VT were randomly assigned 1:1 to a preventive or deferred ablation strategy. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death and unplanned hospitalization for either symptomatic ventricular arrhythmia or worsening heart failure. Secondary outcomes included sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia and appropriate ICD therapy. We hypothesized that preventive ablation strategy would be superior to deferred ablation strategy in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 396±284 days, the primary end point occurred in 25 (32.9%) of 76 patients in the preventive ablation group and 23 (27.7%) of 83 patients in the deferred ablation group (hazard ratio, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.62-1.92]; P=0.77). On the basis of prespecified criteria for interim analyses, the study was terminated early for futility. In the preventive versus deferred ablation group, 6 versus 2 patients died (7.9% versus 2.4%; P=0.18), 8 versus 2 patients were admitted for worsening heart failure (10.4% versus 2.3%; P=0.062), and 15 versus 21 patients were hospitalized for symptomatic ventricular arrhythmia (19.5% versus 25.3%; P=0.27). Among secondary outcomes, the proportions of patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia (39.7% versus 48.2%; P=0.050) and appropriate ICD therapy (34.2% versus 47.0%; P=0.020) were numerically reduced in the preventive ablation group. CONCLUSIONS: Preventive VT ablation before ICD implantation did not reduce mortality or hospitalization for arrhythmia or worsening heart failure during 1 year of follow-up compared with the deferred ablation strategy. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02501005.

Supervised Obesity Reduction Trial for AF ablation patients: results from the SORT-AF trial.

AIMS: Weight management seems to be beneficial for obese atrial fibrillation (AF) patients; however, randomized data are sparse. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the influence of weight reduction on AF ablation outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: SORT-AF is an investigator-sponsored, prospective, randomized, multicentre, and clinical trial. Patients with symptomatic AF (paroxysmal or persistent) and body mass index (BMI) 30-40 kg/m2 underwent AF ablation and were randomized to either weight-reduction (group 1) or usual care (group 2), after sleep-apnoea-screening and loop recorder (ILR) implantation. The primary endpoint was defined as AF burden between 3 and 12 months after AF ablation. Overall, 133 patients (60 ± 10 years, 57% persistent AF) were randomized to group 1 (n = 67) and group 2 (n = 66), respectively. Complications after AF-ablation were rare (one stroke and no tamponade). The intervention led to a significant reduction of BMI (34.9 ± 2.6-33.4 ± 3.6) in group 1 compared to a stable BMI in group 2 (P < 0.001). Atrial fibrillation burden after ablation decreased significantly (P < 0.001), with no significant difference regarding the primary endpoint between the groups (P = 0.815, odds ratio: 1.143, confidence interval: 0.369-3.613). Further analyses showed a significant correlation between BMI and AF recurrence for patients with persistent AF compared with paroxysmal AF patients (P = 0.032). CONCLUSION: The SORT-AF study shows that AF ablation is safe and successful in obese patients using continuous monitoring via ILR. Although the primary endpoint of AF burden after ablation did not differ between the two groups, the effects of weight loss and improvement of exercise activity were beneficial for obese patients with persistent AF demonstrating the relevance of life-style management as an important adjunct to AF ablation in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02064114.

The European TeleCheck-AF project on remote app-based management of atrial fibrillation during the COVID-19 pandemic: centre and patient experiences.

AIMS: TeleCheck-AF is a multicentre international project initiated to maintain care delivery for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) during COVID-19 through teleconsultations supported by an on-demand photoplethysmography-based heart rate and rhythm monitoring app (FibriCheck®). We describe the characteristics, inclusion rates, and experiences from participating centres according the TeleCheck-AF infrastructure as well as characteristics and experiences from recruited patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three surveys exploring centre characteristics (n = 25), centre experiences (n = 23), and patient experiences (n = 826) were completed. Self-reported patient characteristics were obtained from the app. Most centres were academic (64%) and specialized public cardiology/district hospitals (36%). Majority of the centres had AF outpatient clinics (64%) and only 36% had AF ablation clinics. The time required to start patient inclusion and total number of included patients in the project was comparable for centres experienced (56%) or inexperienced in mHealth use. Within 28 weeks, 1930 AF patients were recruited, mainly for remote AF control (31% of patients) and AF ablation follow-up (42%). Average inclusion rate was highest during the lockdown restrictions and reached a steady state at a lower level after easing the restrictions (188 vs. 52 weekly recruited patients). Majority (>80%) of the centres reported no problems during the implementation of the TeleCheck-AF approach. Recruited patients [median age 64 (55-71), 62% male] agreed that the FibriCheck® app was easy to use (94%). CONCLUSION: Despite different health care settings and mobile health experiences, the TeleCheck-AF approach could be set up within an extremely short time and easily used in different European centres during COVID-19.

Internal Versus External Electrical Cardioversion of Atrial Arrhythmia in Patients With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Atrial arrhythmias are common in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). External shocks and internal cardioversion through commanded ICD shock for electrical cardioversion are used for rhythm-control. However, there is a paucity of data on efficacy of external versus internal cardioversion and on the risk of lead and device malfunction. We hypothesized that external cardioversion is noninferior to internal cardioversion for safety, and superior for successful restoration of sinus rhythm. METHODS: Consecutive patients with ICD undergoing elective cardioversion for atrial arrhythmias at 13 centers were randomized in 1:1 fashion to either internal or external cardioversion. The primary safety end point was a composite of surrogate events of lead or device malfunction. Conversion of atrial arrhythmia to sinus rhythm was the primary efficacy end point. Myocardial damage was studied by measuring troponin release in both groups. RESULTS: N=230 patients were randomized. Shock efficacy was 93% in the external cardioversion group and 65% in the internal cardioversion group (P<0.001). Clinically relevant adverse events caused by external or internal cardioversion were not observed. Three cases of pre-existing silent lead malfunction were unmasked by internal shock, resulting in lead failure. Troponin release did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first randomized trial on external vs internal cardioversion in patients with ICDs. External cardioversion was superior for the restoration of sinus rhythm. The unmasking of silent lead malfunction in the internal cardioversion group suggests that an internal shock attempt may be reasonable in selected ICD patients presenting for electrical cardioversion. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03247738.

Long-term efficacy and safety of radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices and transvenous leads.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term efficacy and safety are uncertain in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) and transvenous leads (TVL) undergoing radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). Thus, we assessed the outcome of AF ablation in those patients during long-term follow-up using continuous atrial rhythm monitoring (CARM). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 190 patients (71.3 ± 10.7 years; 108 (56.8% men) were included in this study. At index procedure 81 (42.6%) patients presented with paroxysmal AF and 109 (57.4%) with persistent AF. The ablation strategy included pulmonary vein isolation in all patients and biatrial ablation of complex fractionated electrograms with additional ablation lines, if appropriate. AF recurrences were assessed by CARM- and CIED-related complications by device follow-up. After a mean follow-up of 55.4 ± 38.1 months, freedom of AF was found in 86 (61.4%) and clinical success defined as an AF burden less than or equal to 1% in 101 (72.1%) patients. Freedom of AF was reported in 74.6% and 51.9% (P = 0.006) and clinical success in 89.8% and 59.3% (P < 0.001) of patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF, respectively. In 3 of 408 (0.7%) ablation procedures, a TVL malfunction occurred within 90 days after catheter ablation. During long-term follow-up 9 (4.7%) patients showed lead dislodgement, 2 (1.1%) lead fracture, and 2 (1.1%) lead insulation defect not related to the ablation procedure. CONCLUSION: Our findings using CARM demonstrate long-term efficacy and safety of radiofrequency catheter ablation of AF in patients with CIED and TVL.

Predictors of freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence after cryoballoon ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation: A multicenter study.

AIMS: We sought to assess (1) clinical outcomes of second-generation cryoballoon (CB) ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), and (2) the association of baseline and procedural covariates with atrial arrhythmia recurrence (AAR) after ablation. METHODS: A total of 135 patients (63 ± 11 years, 96 men [71%]) with persistent AF underwent CB ablation at three experienced electrophysiology centers. Freedom from AAR was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. A Cox proportional-hazards model was used to estimate the effects of baseline and procedural covariates on the likelihood of AAR. RESULTS: Freedom from AAR at 6, 12, and 18 months was estimated at 91% (95% confidence interval [CI] 86%-96%), 75% (95% CI, 67%-83%), and 53% (95% CI, 43%-65%), respectively. The presence of an implantable cardiac device (Hazard ratio [HR] 3.09; 95% CI, 1.37-7.00; P = .007), a left atrial (LA) diameter > 50 mm (HR 1.69; 95% CI, 1.02-2.79; P = .043), and absence of antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy before the ablation procedure (HR 3.12; 95% CI, 1.72-5.64; P < .001) were associated with AAR. A trend toward an increased risk of AAR was revealed for women (HR 1.73; 95% CI, 0.96-3.11; P = .069). CONCLUSIONS: CB ablation for persistent AF resulted in freedom from AAR about that reported for RF ablation. The presence of an implantable cardiac device, LA size, and absence of AAD therapy at baseline were associated with the risk of AAR.

Incidence of intracardiac thrombus formation prior to electrical cardioversion in respect to the mode of oral anticoagulation.

AIMS: To evaluate the incidence of newly diagnosed intracardiac thrombi (ICT) in respect to the mode of OAC in patients undergoing cardioversion (CV). METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively assessed transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and OAC therapy prior to CV in AF patients with ≥48-hour duration scheduled for CV. A total of 60 first-time ICT (4.7%) were diagnosed in 1,286 TEE, with highest rate in patients without OAC (9.6% vs. OAC 4.1%, P  =  0.009) and an apparently lower rate in nonvitamin K antagonist anticoagulants (NOAC) therapy compared to vitamin K antagonist (VKA) (2.5% vs. 5.3%, P  =  0.02). VKA therapy control 4 weeks prior to CV was overall average (time in therapeutic range 60%) and patients showed more frequently clinical characteristics and TEE parameters associated with risk for ICT. Even among patients with effective OAC therapy (uninterrupted NOAC and VKA therapy with international normalized ratio (INR) ≥2.0 for 3 weeks), ICT occurred in 2.7%, but with no difference between both groups (P  =  0.22). There was no difference between different types of NOAC. Independent predictors for ICT were history of embolism, hypertension, BMI, absence of OAC, renal function, reduced atrial appendage flow, and presence of spontaneous echo contrast. CONCLUSION: NOAC therapy seems favorable in the overall prevention of ICT, although this is likely to be caused by suboptimal VKA therapy control and differences in the overall health status between VKA and NOAC patients. ICT occurred even with effective OAC therapy suggesting individual TEE-guided cardioversion in patients at risk.

Combination of a subcutaneous ICD in a patient with a baroreceptor activation device: Feasibility, safety, and precautions: A Case Report.

We present a case of a patient with a baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) receiving a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD). We anticipated two possible hazardous interactions between the two devices. Stimulation by the BAT could be adjudicated as noise and result in underdetection of ventricular arrhythmias or it might be misinterpreted as ventricular arrhythmias and lead to inappropriate shocks. Postop ensing occurred, the upper limit of pulse width of the BAT was limited because of noise detection by the S-ICD, but the upper limit of amplitude was limited by patient's discomfort. In this patient, the combination of a BAT and an S-ICD was safe.