No abstract

Background Modification of arrhythmogenic substrates with extensive ablation comprising linear and/or complex fractional atrial electrogram ablation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI‐plus) can theoretically reduce the recurrence of atrial fibrillation. The DR‐FLASH score (score based on diabetes mellitus, renal dysfunction, persistent form of atrial fibrillation, left atrialdiameter >45 mm, age >65 years, female sex, and hypertension) is reportedly useful for identifying patients with arrhythmogenic substrates. We hypothesized that, in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, the DR‐FLASH score can be used to classify patients into those who require PVI‐plus and those for whom a PVI‐only strategy is sufficient. Methods and Results This study is a post hoc subanalysis of the a multicenter, randomized controlled, noninferiority trial investigating efficacy and safety of pulmonary vein isolation alone for recurrence prevention compared with extensive ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (EARNEST‐PVI trial). This analysis focuses on the relationship between DR‐FLASH score and the efficacy of different ablation strategies. We divided the population into 2 groups based on a DR‐FLASH score of 3 points. A total of 469 patients were analyzed. Among those with a DR‐FLASH score >3 (N=279), the event rate of atrial arrhythmia recurrence was significantly lower in the PVI‐plus arm than in the PVI‐only arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45 [95% CI, 0.28–0.72]; P <0.001). In contrast, among patients with a DR‐FLASH score ≤3 (N=217), no differences were observed in the event rate of atrial arrhythmia recurrence between the PVI‐only arm and the PVI‐plus arm (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.61–1.89]; P =0.795). There was significant interaction between patients with a DR‐FLASH score >3 and DR‐FLASH score ≤3 ( P value for interaction=0.020). Conclusions The DR‐FLASH score is a useful tool for deciding the catheter ablation strategy for patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03514693.

Background BIOSCIENCE randomized trial which compared biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents with ultra-thin (60μm) strut (ultra-thin BP-SES) and durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents with thin (81μm) strut (thin DP-EES) have reported that definite stent thrombosis within 1 year had more frequently occurred in ultra-thin BP-SES (0.9%) than in thin DP-EES group (0.4%) although it was not statistically significant. It suggests that neointimal coverage after stent implantation within 1 year might be different between ultra-thin BP-SES and thin DP-EES. Recently, two types of biogradable-polymer sirorimus eluting stents, thin (80μm) strut type (thin BP-SES) and ultra-thin (60μm) strut type (ultra-thin BP-SES), can be available in clinical settings. Purpose We compared neointimal coverage conditions between ultra-thin BP-SES and thin BP-SES by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Methods Consecutive Forty-six patients who underwent 21 ultra-thin BP-SESs or 25 thin BP-SESs implantation were enrolled. We compared incidences of acute coronary syndrome, type B2/C lesion, atherectomy device use, stent size, stent length, maximum inflation pressure, and 8-month follow-up OCT parameters including proportions of uncovered struts (%Uncovered), malapposed struts, (%Mallaposed) and mean neointimal hyperplasia thickness (mean NHT) between the two groups. Results %Uncovered and %malapposed were significantly higher and mean NHT was significantly lower in ultra-thin BP-SES than in thin BP-SES (Table). The other parameters were similar between the two groups. Conclusion Ultra-thin BP-SES showed worse neointimal coverage as compared to thin BP-SES within 1 year after stent implantation, which may increase stent thrombosis. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

No abstract

Background Little has been reported on the outcome of contact force (CF)-guided radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) and second generation cryoballoon ablation (CBA). Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the outcome of CF-guided RFCA and second generation CBA for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). Methods We enrolled the consecutive 364 patients with PAF who underwent initial ablation between September 2014 and July 2018 in our hospital. We compared the late recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia more than three months after ablation between RFCA group and CBA group. All RFCA procedures were performed using CF-sensing catheter and all CBA procedures were performed using second generation CB. Results There were significant differences in background characteristics: chronic kidney disease, serum brain natriuretic peptide level, and left ventricular ejection fraction. After propensity score matched analysis (Table), atrial tachyarrhythmia free survival was significantly higher in CBA group than in RFCA group (Figure). Conclusions Second generation CBA showed a significantly lower late recurrence rate compared to CF-guided RFCA. Kaplan-Meier Curve Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None