Background-The objective of this study was to assess the incidence and impact of asymptomatic arrhythmia in patients with highly symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) who qualified for radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation. Methods and Results-In this prospective study, 114 patients with at least 3 documented AF episodes together with corresponding symptoms and an ineffective trial of at least 1 antiarrhythmic drug were selected for RF ablation. With the use of CARTO, circumferential lesions around the pulmonary veins and linear lesions at the roof of the left atrium and along the left atrial isthmus were placed. A continuous, 7-day, Holter session was recorded before ablation, right after ablation, and after 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up. During each 7-day Holter monitoring, the patients recorded quality and duration of any complaints by using a detailed symptom log. More than 70 000 hours of ECG recording were analyzed. In the 7-day Holter records before ablation, 92 of 114 patients (81%) had documented AF episodes. All episodes were symptomatic in 35 patients (38%). In 52 patients (57%), both symptomatic and asymptomatic episodes were recorded, whereas in 5 patients (5%), all documented AF episodes were asymptomatic. After ablation, the percentage of patients with only asymptomatic AF recurrences increased to 37% (PϽ0.05) at the 6-month follow-up. An analysis of patient characteristics and arrhythmia patterns failed to identify a specific subset who were at high risk for the development of asymptomatic AF.
Conclusions-Even
Aims
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) compared with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for symptomatic paroxysmal or drug-refractory persistent atrial fibrillation (AF).
Methods and results
Prospective cluster cohort study in experienced CBA and RFA centres. Primary endpoint was ‘atrial arrhythmia recurrence’, secondary endpoints were as follows: procedural results, safety, and clinical course. A total of 4189 patients were included: CBA 2329 (55.6%) and RFA 1860 (44.4%). Cryoballoon ablation population was younger, with fewer comorbidities. Procedure time was longer in the RFA group (P = 0.01). Radiation exposure was 2487 (CBA) and 1792 cGycm2 (RFA) (P < 0.001). Follow-up duration was 441 (CBA) and 511 days (RFA) (P < 0.0001). Primary endpoint occurred in 30.7% (CBA) and 39.4% patients (RFA) [adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70–1.04; P = 0.12). In paroxysmal AF, CBA resulted in a lower risk of recurrence (adjHR 0.80, 95% CI 0.64–0.99; P = 0.047). In persistent AF, the primary outcome was not different between groups. Major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event rates were 1.0% (CBA) and 2.8% (RFA) (adjHR 0.53, 95% CI 0.26–1.10; P = 0.088). Re-ablations (adjHR 0.46, 95% CI 0.34–0.61; P < 0.0001) and adverse events during follow-up (adjHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48–0.88; P = 0.005) were less common after CBA. Higher rehospitalization rates with RFA were caused by re-ablations.
Conclusions
The primary endpoint did not differ between CBA and RFA. Cryoballoon ablation was completed rapidly; the radiation exposure was greater. Rehospitalization due to re-ablations and adverse events during follow-up were observed significantly less frequently after CBA than after RFA. Subgroup analysis suggested a lower risk of recurrence after CBA in paroxysmal AF.
Trial Registration
ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01360008), https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01360008.
Anatomic tagging of esophagus revealed a highly variable proximity to different areas of the posterior LA suggesting individual adjustment of encircling and linear ablation lines in AF ablation procedures to avoid the life threatening complication of esophagus perforation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.