No abstract

Background: Advanced generation ablation technologies have been developed to achieve more effective pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and minimize arrhythmia recurrence after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Methods: We randomly assigned 346 patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal AF to contact force–guided radiofrequency ablation (CF-RF; n=115), 4-minute cryoballoon ablation (Cryo-4; n=115), or 2-minute cryoballoon ablation (Cryo-2; n=116). Follow-up was 12 months. The primary outcome was time to first documented recurrence of symptomatic or asymptomatic atrial tachyarrhythmia (AF, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia) between days 91 and 365 after ablation or a repeat ablation procedure at any time. Secondary end points included freedom from symptomatic arrhythmia and AF burden. All patients received an implantable loop recorder. Results: One-year freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia defined by continuous rhythm monitoring was 53.9%, 52.2%, and 51.7% with CF-RF, Cryo-4, and Cryo-2, respectively ( P =0.87). One-year freedom from symptomatic atrial tachyarrhythmia defined by continuous rhythm monitoring was 79.1%, 78.2%, and 73.3% with CF-RF, Cryo-4, and Cryo-2, respectively ( P =0.26). Compared with the monitoring period before ablation, AF burden was reduced by a median of 99.3% (interquartile range, 67.8%–100.0%) with CF-RF, 99.9% (interquartile range, 65.3%–100.0%) with Cryo-4, and 98.4% (interquartile range, 56.2%–100.0%) with Cryo-2 ( P =0.36). Serious adverse events occurred in 3 patients (2.6%) in the CF-RF group, 6 patients (5.3%) in the Cryo-4 group, and 7 patients (6.0%) in the Cryo-2 group, with no significant difference between groups ( P =0.24). The CF-RF group had a significantly longer procedure duration but significantly shorter fluoroscopy exposure ( P <0.001 vs cryoballoon groups). Conclusions: In this multicenter, randomized, single-blinded trial, CF-RF and 2 different regimens of cryoballoon ablation resulted in no difference in 1-year efficacy, which was 53% by time to first recurrence but >98% burden reduction as assessed by continuous cardiac rhythm monitoring. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01913522.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) frequently coexist and can be challenging to treat. Pharmacologic based rhythm-control of AF has not proven to be superior to rate-control. Ablation-based rhythm-control was compared to rate-control to evaluate if clinical outcomes in patients with HF and AF could be improved. Methods: This was a multicenter, open-label trial with blinded outcome evaluation using a central adjudication committee. Patients with high burden paroxysmal (>4 episodes in six months) or persistent (duration < three years) AF, New York Heart Association class II-III HF, and elevated NT-proBNP were randomized to ablation-based rhythm-control or rate-control. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and all HF events, with a minimum follow up of two years. Secondary outcomes included left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), six-minute walk test and NT-proBNP. Quality of life was measured using the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) and the AF Effect on quality of life (AFEQT). The primary analysis was time-to-event using Cox proportional hazards modeling. The trial was stopped early due to a determination of apparent futility by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee. Results: From December 1, 2011, to January 20, 2018, 411 patients were randomized to ablation-based rhythm-control (n=214) or rate-control (n=197). The primary outcome occurred in 50 (23.4%) patients in the ablation-based rhythm-control group and 64 (32.5%) patients in the rate-control group (hazard ratio 0.71 95% CI (0.49, 1.03), p=0.066). LVEF increased in the ablation-based group (10.1±1.2% vs 3.8±1.2%, p=0.017); six-minute walk distance improved (44.9±9.1 meters 27.5±9.7 meters, p=0.025) and NT-proBNP demonstrated a decrease (mean change -77.1% vs -39.2%, p<0.0001). MLHFQ demonstrated greater improvement in the ablation-based rhythm-control group (LSMD of -5.4, 95%CI (-10.5, -0.3), p=0.0036), as did the AFEQT score (LSMD of 6.2, 95%CI (1.7, 10.7), p=0.0005). Serious adverse events were observed in 50% of patients in both treatment groups. Conclusions: In patients with high burden AF and HF, there was no statistical difference in all-cause mortality or HF events with ablation-based rhythm-control versus rate-control, however, there was a non-significant trend for improved outcomes with ablation-based rhythm control over rate-control.

IMPORTANCE Many patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy experience chronic pain and inadequate relief despite best available medical treatments.OBJECTIVE To determine whether 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation (SCS) improves outcomes for patients with refractory painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThe prospective, multicenter, open-label SENZA-PDN randomized clinical trial compared conventional medical management (CMM) with 10-kHz SCS plus CMM. Participants with PDN for 1 year or more refractory to gabapentinoids and at least 1 other analgesic class, lower limb pain intensity of 5 cm or more on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS), body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 45 or less, hemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c ) of 10% or less, daily morphine equivalents of 120 mg or less, and medically appropriate for the procedure were recruited from clinic patient populations and digital advertising. Participants were enrolled from multiple sites across the US, including academic centers and community pain clinics, between August 2017 and August 2019 with 6-month follow-up and optional crossover at 6 months. Screening 430 patients resulted in 214 who were excluded or declined participation and 216 who were randomized. At 6-month follow-up, 187 patients were evaluated.INTERVENTIONS Implanted medical device delivering 10-kHz SCS. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe prespecified primary end point was percentage of participants with 50% pain relief or more on VAS without worsening of baseline neurological deficits at 3 months. Secondary end points were tested hierarchically, as prespecified in the analysis plan. Measures included pain VAS, neurological examination, health-related quality of life (EuroQol Five-Dimension questionnaire), and HbA 1c over 6 months. RESULTSOf 216 randomized patients, 136 (63.0%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 60.8 (10.7) years. Additionally, the median (interquartile range) duration of diabetes and peripheral neuropathy were 10.9 (6.3-16.4) years and 5.6 (3.0-10.1) years, respectively. The primary end point assessed in the intention-to-treat population was met by 5 of 94 patients in the CMM group (5%) and 75 of 95 patients in the 10-kHz SCS plus CMM group (79%; difference, 73.6%; 95% CI, 64.2-83.0; P < .001). Infections requiring device explant occurred in 2 patients in the 10-kHz SCS plus CMM group (2%). For the CMM group, the mean pain VAS score was 7.0 cm (95% CI, 6.7-7.3) at baseline and 6.9 cm (95% CI, 6.5-7.3) at 6 months. For the 10-kHz SCS plus CMM group, the mean pain VAS score was 7.6 cm (95% CI, 7.3-7.9) at baseline and 1.7 cm (95% CI, 1.3-2.1) at 6 months. Investigators observed neurological examination improvements for 3 of 92 patients in the CMM group (3%) and 52 of 84 in the 10-kHz SCS plus CMM group (62%) at 6 months (difference, 58.6%; 95% CI, 47.6-69.6; P < .001).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Substantial pain relief and improved health-related quality of life sustained over 6 months demonstrates 10-kHz SCS can s...