Scott J. Pollak

The effect of atrial pacing therapies on atrial tachyarrhythmia burden and frequency: Results of a randomized trial in patients with bradycardia and atrial tachyarrhythmias

OBJECTIVES The Atrial Therapy Efficacy and Safety Trial (ATTEST) was a prospective, randomized study to evaluate preventive pacing and antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial tachycardia (AT). BACKGROUND The effect of the combination of atrial prevention and termination algorithms on AT/AF burden and frequency in pacemaker patients is unknown. METHODS A DDDRP pacemaker (AT500, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota) with three atrial preventive pacing algorithms and two ATP algorithms was implanted in 368 patients. Patients were randomized one-month post-implant to all prevention and ATP therapies ON or OFF and followed for three months. The OFF group had DDDR pacing at a lower programmed rate of 60 ppm. The AT/AF burden and frequency were determined from daily device counters in 324 patients treated according to protocol. RESULTS In 17,018 episodes with stored electrograms, appropriate detection was confirmed in 17,004 (99.9%). The median percentage of atrial pacing was 98% in the ON group versus 75% in the OFF group (p < 0.001). Using device-defined criteria for successful termination, ATP terminated 8,590 (54%) of 15,789 treated episodes. The median AT/AF burden during the three-month study period was 4.2 h/month ON versus 1.1 h/month OFF (p = 0.20). The median AT/AF frequency was 1.3 episodes/month ON versus 1.2 episodes/month OFF (p = 0.65). System-related, complication-free survival at four months was 90.2% (Kaplan-Meier estimate). CONCLUSIONS This DDDRP pacemaker is safe, has accurate AT/AF detection, and provides ATP with 54% efficacy as defined by the device. The atrial prevention and termination therapies combined did not reduce AT/AF burden or frequency in this patient population.

Early repolarization associated with sudden death: insights from noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging.

Early repolarization (significant elevation of the QRS-ST junction in the inferior or lateral ECG leads), thought previously to be a benign entity, was recently shown1,2 to be more prevalent in patients with a history of idiopathic ventricular fibrillation. Electrocardiographic Imaging (ECGI)3,4,6 is a novel noninvasive imaging modality that generates electroanatomic maps of epicardial activation and repolarization.

Pulmonary vein isolation using a pace-capture-guided versus an adenosine-guided approach: effect on dormant conduction and long-term freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation--a prospective study.

Background— Atrial fibrillation recurrence after pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is associated with PV to left atrium reconduction. We prospectively studied the use of 2 procedural techniques designed to facilitate identification of residual gaps within the index ablation line. Methods and Results— After wide circumferential PV isolation, 40 patients received additional ablation targeted at locations of left atrial capture during high-output pacing (pace-capture group), while 40 patients underwent adenosine testing with targeted ablation at sites of dormant conduction (adenosine group). Patients were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months. After PV isolation, high-output pace-capture was documented in 39 PVs (25%; 50% of patients) in the pace-capture group. Dormant conduction was unmasked in 34 PVs (22%; 53% of patients) in the adenosine group. A subset of 25 patients in the pace-capture group underwent adenosine testing without targeted ablation of dormant conduction. In these patients, only 10 out of 86 PVs (11.6%; 24% of patients) demonstrated dormant conduction after the elimination of local pace-capture. At a follow-up of 329±124 days, the single procedure off antiarrhythmic drug freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation was 67.5% in the adenosine group and 65.0% in the pace-capture group ( P =0.814). Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in the pace-capture group ( P =0.002 and P <0.001), whereas radiofrequency ablation time was comparable ( P =0.192). Conclusions— The use of high-output pacing post-PV isolation results in a significant reduction in the incidence of dormant conduction with a comparable long-term freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation (versus adenosine-guided ablation). The use of these approaches requires evaluation in a long-term prospective randomized study.Background—Atrial fibrillation recurrence after pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is associated with PV to left atrium reconduction. We prospectively studied the use of 2 procedural techniques designed to facilitate identification of residual gaps within the index ablation line. Methods and Results—After wide circumferential PV isolation, 40 patients received additional ablation targeted at locations of left atrial capture during high-output pacing (pace-capture group), while 40 patients underwent adenosine testing with targeted ablation at sites of dormant conduction (adenosine group). Patients were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months. After PV isolation, high-output pace-capture was documented in 39 PVs (25%; 50% of patients) in the pace-capture group. Dormant conduction was unmasked in 34 PVs (22%; 53% of patients) in the adenosine group. A subset of 25 patients in the pace-capture group underwent adenosine testing without targeted ablation of dormant conduction. In these patients, only 10 out of 86 PVs (11.6%; 24% of patients) demonstrated dormant conduction after the elimination of local pace-capture. At a follow-up of 329±124 days, the single procedure off antiarrhythmic drug freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation was 67.5% in the adenosine group and 65.0% in the pace-capture group (P=0.814). Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in the pace-capture group (P=0.002 and P<0.001), whereas radiofrequency ablation time was comparable (P=0.192). Conclusions—The use of high-output pacing post-PV isolation results in a significant reduction in the incidence of dormant conduction with a comparable long-term freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation (versus adenosine-guided ablation). The use of these approaches requires evaluation in a long-term prospective randomized study.

Consistency of the CFAE Phenomena Using Custom Software for Automated Detection of Complex Fractionated Atrial Electrograms (CFAEs) in the Left Atrium During Atrial Fibrillation

Introduction: Complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAEs) have been described as a potential target for ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). The purpose of this study is to assess the consistency of the CFAE phenomena using custom software for automated detection of CFAEs in the left atrium during AF.

Pulmonary Vein Isolation Using a Pace-Capture–Guided Versus an Adenosine-Guided ApproachClinical Perspective: Effect on Dormant Conduction and Long-Term Freedom From Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation—A Prospective Study

Background— Atrial fibrillation recurrence after pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is associated with PV to left atrium reconduction. We prospectively studied the use of 2 procedural techniques designed to facilitate identification of residual gaps within the index ablation line. Methods and Results— After wide circumferential PV isolation, 40 patients received additional ablation targeted at locations of left atrial capture during high-output pacing (pace-capture group), while 40 patients underwent adenosine testing with targeted ablation at sites of dormant conduction (adenosine group). Patients were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months. After PV isolation, high-output pace-capture was documented in 39 PVs (25%; 50% of patients) in the pace-capture group. Dormant conduction was unmasked in 34 PVs (22%; 53% of patients) in the adenosine group. A subset of 25 patients in the pace-capture group underwent adenosine testing without targeted ablation of dormant conduction. In these patients, only 10 out of 86 PVs (11.6%; 24% of patients) demonstrated dormant conduction after the elimination of local pace-capture. At a follow-up of 329±124 days, the single procedure off antiarrhythmic drug freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation was 67.5% in the adenosine group and 65.0% in the pace-capture group ( P =0.814). Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in the pace-capture group ( P =0.002 and P <0.001), whereas radiofrequency ablation time was comparable ( P =0.192). Conclusions— The use of high-output pacing post-PV isolation results in a significant reduction in the incidence of dormant conduction with a comparable long-term freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation (versus adenosine-guided ablation). The use of these approaches requires evaluation in a long-term prospective randomized study.Background—Atrial fibrillation recurrence after pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is associated with PV to left atrium reconduction. We prospectively studied the use of 2 procedural techniques designed to facilitate identification of residual gaps within the index ablation line. Methods and Results—After wide circumferential PV isolation, 40 patients received additional ablation targeted at locations of left atrial capture during high-output pacing (pace-capture group), while 40 patients underwent adenosine testing with targeted ablation at sites of dormant conduction (adenosine group). Patients were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months. After PV isolation, high-output pace-capture was documented in 39 PVs (25%; 50% of patients) in the pace-capture group. Dormant conduction was unmasked in 34 PVs (22%; 53% of patients) in the adenosine group. A subset of 25 patients in the pace-capture group underwent adenosine testing without targeted ablation of dormant conduction. In these patients, only 10 out of 86 PVs (11.6%; 24% of patients) demonstrated dormant conduction after the elimination of local pace-capture. At a follow-up of 329±124 days, the single procedure off antiarrhythmic drug freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation was 67.5% in the adenosine group and 65.0% in the pace-capture group (P=0.814). Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in the pace-capture group (P=0.002 and P<0.001), whereas radiofrequency ablation time was comparable (P=0.192). Conclusions—The use of high-output pacing post-PV isolation results in a significant reduction in the incidence of dormant conduction with a comparable long-term freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation (versus adenosine-guided ablation). The use of these approaches requires evaluation in a long-term prospective randomized study.

Pulmonary Vein Isolation Using a Pace-Capture–Guided Versus an Adenosine-Guided ApproachClinical Perspective

Background— Atrial fibrillation recurrence after pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is associated with PV to left atrium reconduction. We prospectively studied the use of 2 procedural techniques designed to facilitate identification of residual gaps within the index ablation line. Methods and Results— After wide circumferential PV isolation, 40 patients received additional ablation targeted at locations of left atrial capture during high-output pacing (pace-capture group), while 40 patients underwent adenosine testing with targeted ablation at sites of dormant conduction (adenosine group). Patients were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months. After PV isolation, high-output pace-capture was documented in 39 PVs (25%; 50% of patients) in the pace-capture group. Dormant conduction was unmasked in 34 PVs (22%; 53% of patients) in the adenosine group. A subset of 25 patients in the pace-capture group underwent adenosine testing without targeted ablation of dormant conduction. In these patients, only 10 out of 86 PVs (11.6%; 24% of patients) demonstrated dormant conduction after the elimination of local pace-capture. At a follow-up of 329±124 days, the single procedure off antiarrhythmic drug freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation was 67.5% in the adenosine group and 65.0% in the pace-capture group ( P =0.814). Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in the pace-capture group ( P =0.002 and P <0.001), whereas radiofrequency ablation time was comparable ( P =0.192). Conclusions— The use of high-output pacing post-PV isolation results in a significant reduction in the incidence of dormant conduction with a comparable long-term freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation (versus adenosine-guided ablation). The use of these approaches requires evaluation in a long-term prospective randomized study.Background—Atrial fibrillation recurrence after pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is associated with PV to left atrium reconduction. We prospectively studied the use of 2 procedural techniques designed to facilitate identification of residual gaps within the index ablation line. Methods and Results—After wide circumferential PV isolation, 40 patients received additional ablation targeted at locations of left atrial capture during high-output pacing (pace-capture group), while 40 patients underwent adenosine testing with targeted ablation at sites of dormant conduction (adenosine group). Patients were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months. After PV isolation, high-output pace-capture was documented in 39 PVs (25%; 50% of patients) in the pace-capture group. Dormant conduction was unmasked in 34 PVs (22%; 53% of patients) in the adenosine group. A subset of 25 patients in the pace-capture group underwent adenosine testing without targeted ablation of dormant conduction. In these patients, only 10 out of 86 PVs (11.6%; 24% of patients) demonstrated dormant conduction after the elimination of local pace-capture. At a follow-up of 329±124 days, the single procedure off antiarrhythmic drug freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation was 67.5% in the adenosine group and 65.0% in the pace-capture group (P=0.814). Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in the pace-capture group (P=0.002 and P<0.001), whereas radiofrequency ablation time was comparable (P=0.192). Conclusions—The use of high-output pacing post-PV isolation results in a significant reduction in the incidence of dormant conduction with a comparable long-term freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation (versus adenosine-guided ablation). The use of these approaches requires evaluation in a long-term prospective randomized study.