Intracardiac echocardiography is feasible to guide transseptal puncture. The optimal puncture site can be assessed by simultaneous detection of the characteristic downward jump of the transseptal needle onto the fossa ovalis by intracardiac ultrasound and fluoroscopy.

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Approximately 18% of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergo a repeat ablation within 12 months after their index ablation. Despite the high prevalence, comparative studies on non-pulmonary vein (PV) target strategies in repeat AF ablation are scarce. Purpose: This study aims to describe 12 months efficacy of non-PV and PV target ablations as a repeat ablation strategy. Methods A multicentre retrospective, descriptive study was conducted with data of 280 patients who underwent repeat AF ablation. Ablation strategy for repeat ablation was at the operators’ discretion. Non-PV target ablation (n=140) included posterior wall isolation, mitral line, roofline and/or complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation. PV target ablation (n=140), included re-isolation and/or wide atrium circumferential ablation. Patients’ demographics and rhythm outcomes during 12-months follow-up were analysed. Results: Overall, the mean age was 63 ± 9 years, 64% were male, and body mass index was 27.1 ± 4.2. Patients undergoing non-PV target ablation had more frequently persistent AF (47.9% vs 14.3%, p < 0.001), and had a higher CHA2DS2 VASc (2.0 vs 1.3, p < 0.001). At 12 months, more atrial tachyarrhythmias were observed in the non-PV target group (48.6%) compared to the PV target group (29.3%, p=0.001). Similarly, a significantly higher AF and atrial tachycardia (AT) recurrence rate was observed after non-PV target ablation compared to PV target ablation (36.4% versus 22.1% and 22.9% versus 10.7%). After adjusting for several associated covariates, a significantly higher AT recurrence risk remained in the non-PV target group (adjusted OR 2.19 95% CI 1.18 – 4.42, p = 0.023) (Figure 1C). Sensitivity analysis was performed with inverse propensity weighting to assess the robustness of the multivariate model and demonstrated comparable outcomes. Both groups significantly de-escalated anti-arrhythmic drug use, de-escalation was more profound after PV target ablation. Patients with isolated PVs during non-PV target ablation had a significantly higher risk for AF recurrence than those with reconnected PVs (Figure 1B). Conclusion: Compared to PV target ablation, non-PV target repeat ablation did not improve outcomes after 12 months and was independently associated with a higher risk for AT recurrences.

No abstract