Steven Hao

Pulmonary-Vein Isolation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Heart Failure

BACKGROUND Pulmonary-vein isolation is increasingly being used to treat atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure. METHODS In this prospective, multicenter clinical trial, we randomly assigned patients with symptomatic, drug-resistant atrial fibrillation, an ejection fraction of 40% or less, and New York Heart Association class II or III heart failure to undergo either pulmonary-vein isolation or atrioventricular-node ablation with biventricular pacing. All patients completed the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire (scores range from 0 to 105, with a higher score indicating a worse quality of life) and underwent echocardiography and a 6-minute walk test (the composite primary end point). Over a 6-month period, patients were monitored for both symptomatic and asymptomatic episodes of atrial fibrillation. RESULTS In all, 41 patients underwent pulmonary-vein isolation, and 40 underwent atrioventricular-node ablation with biventricular pacing; none were lost to follow-up at 6 months. The composite primary end point favored the group that underwent pulmonary-vein isolation, with an improved questionnaire score at 6 months (60, vs. 82 in the group that underwent atrioventricular-node ablation with biventricular pacing; P<0.001), a longer 6-minute-walk distance (340 m vs. 297 m, P<0.001), and a higher ejection fraction (35% vs. 28%, P<0.001). In the group that underwent pulmonary-vein isolation, 88% of patients receiving antiarrhythmic drugs and 71% of those not receiving such drugs were free of atrial fibrillation at 6 months. In the group that underwent pulmonary-vein isolation, pulmonary-vein stenosis developed in two patients, pericardial effusion in one, and pulmonary edema in another; in the group that underwent atrioventricular-node ablation with biventricular pacing, lead dislodgment was found in one patient and pneumothorax in another. CONCLUSIONS Pulmonary-vein isolation was superior to atrioventricular-node ablation with biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure who had drug-refractory atrial fibrillation. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00599976.)

Left Atrial Appendage An Underrecognized Trigger Site of Atrial Fibrillation

Background— Together with pulmonary veins, many extrapulmonary vein areas may be the source of initiation and maintenance of atrial fibrillation. The left atrial appendage (LAA) is an underestimated site of initiation of atrial fibrillation. Here, we report the prevalence of triggers from the LAA and the best strategy for successful ablation. Methods and Results— Nine hundred eighty-seven consecutive patients (29% paroxysmal, 71% nonparoxysmal) undergoing redo catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation were enrolled. Two hundred sixty-six patients (27%) showed firing from the LAA and became the study population. In 86 of 987 patients (8.7%; 5 paroxysmal, 81 nonparoxysmal), the LAA was found to be the only source of arrhythmia with no pulmonary veins or other extrapulmonary vein site reconnection. Ablation was performed either with focal lesion (n=56; group 2) or to achieve LAA isolation by placement of the circular catheter at the ostium of the LAA guided by intracardiac echocardiography (167 patients; group 3). In the remaining patients, LAA firing was not ablated (n=43; group 1). At the 12±3-month follow-up, 32 patients (74%) in group 1 had recurrence compared with 38 (68%) in group 2 and 25 (15%) in group 3 (P<0.001). Conclusions— The LAA appears to be responsible for arrhythmias in 27% of patients presenting for repeat procedures. Isolation of the LAA could achieve freedom from atrial fibrillation in patients presenting for a repeat procedure when arrhythmias initiating from this structure are demonstrated.

Ablation for longstanding permanent atrial fibrillation: Results from a randomized study comparing three different strategies

BACKGROUND This prospective multicenter randomized study aimed to compare the efficacy of 3 common ablation methods used for longstanding permanent atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS A total of 144 patients with longstanding permanent AF (median duration 28 months) were randomly assigned to circumferential pulmonary vein ablation (CPVA, group 1, n = 47), to pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI, group 2, n = 48) or to a hybrid strategy combining ablation of complex fractionated or rapid atrial electrograms (CFAE) in both atria followed by a pulmonary vein antrum isolation (CFAE + PVAI, group 3, n = 49). RESULTS Scarring in the left atrium and structural heart disease/hypertension were present in most patients (65%). After a mean follow-up of 16 months, 11% of patients in group 1, 40% of patients in group 2 and 61% of patients in group 3 were in sinus rhythm after one procedure and with no antiarrhythmic drugs (P < .001). Sinus rhythm maintenance would increase respectively to 28% (group 1), 83% (group 2), and 94% (group 3) after 2 procedures and with antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs, P < .001). The AF terminated during ablation, either by conversion to sinus rhythm or organization into an atrial tachyarrhythmia, in 13% of patients (group 1), 44% (group 2), and 74% (group 3) respectively. CFAE alone, performed as the first step of the ablation in group 3, organized AF in only 1 patient. CONCLUSION In this study, the hybrid AF ablation strategy including antrum isolation and CFAE ablation had the highest likelihood of maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with longstanding permanent AF. Electrical isolation of the PVs, although inadequate if performed alone, is relevant to achieve long-term sinus rhythm maintenance after ablation. Bi-atrial CFAE ablation had a minimal impact on AF termination during ablation.

Periprocedural Stroke and Management of Major Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation The Impact of Periprocedural Therapeutic International Normalized Ratio

Background— Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation is associated with the potential risk of periprocedural stroke, which can range between 1% and 5%. We developed a prospective database to evaluate the prevalence of stroke over time and to assess whether the periprocedural anticoagulation strategy and use of open irrigation ablation catheter have resulted in a reduction of this complication. Methods and Results— We collected data from 9 centers performing the same ablation procedure with the same anticoagulation protocol. We divided the patients into 3 groups: ablation with an 8-mm catheter off warfarin (group 1), ablation with an open irrigated catheter off warfarin (group 2), and ablation with an open irrigated catheter on warfarin (group 3). Outcome data on stroke/transient ischemic attack and bleeding complications during and early after the procedures were collected. Of 6454 consecutive patients in the study, 2488 were in group 1, 1348 were in group 2, and 2618 were in group 3. Periprocedural stroke/transient ischemic attack occurred in 27 patients (1.1%) in group 1 and 12 patients (0.9%) in group 2. Despite a higher prevalence of nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation and more patients with CHADS2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age >75 years, diabetes mellitus, and prior stroke or transient ischemic attack) score >2, no stroke/transient ischemic attack was reported in group 3. Complications among groups 1, 2, and 3, including major bleeding (10 [0.4%], 11 [0.8%], and 10 [0.4%], respectively; P>0.05) and pericardial effusion (11 [0.4%], 11 [0.8%], and 12 [0.5%]; P>0.05), were equally distributed. Conclusion— The combination of an open irrigation ablation catheter and periprocedural therapeutic anticoagulation with warfarin may reduce the risk of periprocedural stroke without increasing the risk of pericardial effusion or other bleeding complications.

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation in Patients With Therapeutic International Normalized Ratio : Comparison of Strategies of Anticoagulation Management in the Periprocedural Period

Background— The best approach to management of anticoagulation before and after atrial fibrillation ablation is not known. Methods and Results— We compared outcomes in consecutive patients undergoing pulmonary vein antrum isolation for persistent atrial fibrillation. Early in our practice, warfarin was stopped 3 days before ablation, and a transesophageal echocardiogram was performed to rule out clot. Enoxaparin, initially 1 mg/kg twice daily (group 1) and then 0.5 mg/kg twice daily (group 2), was used to “bridge” patients after ablation. Subsequently, warfarin was continued to maintain the international normalized ratio between 2 and 3.5 (group 3). Minor bleeding was defined as hematoma that did not require intervention. Major bleeding was defined as either cardiac tamponade, hematoma that required intervention, or bleeding that required blood transfusion. Pulmonary vein ablation was performed in 355 patients (group 1=105, group 2=100, and group 3=150). More patients had spontaneous echocardiographic contrast in groups 1 and 2. One patient in group 1 had an ischemic stroke compared with 2 patients in group 2 and no patients in group 3. In group 1, 23 patients had minor bleeding, 9 had major bleeding, and 1 had pericardial effusion but no tamponade. In group 2, 19 patients had minor bleeding, and 2 patients developed symptomatic pericardial effusion with need for pericardiocentesis 1 week after discharge. In group 3, 8 patients developed minor bleeding, and 1 patient developed pericardial effusion with no tamponade. Conclusions— Continuation of warfarin throughout pulmonary vein ablation without administration of enoxaparin is safe and efficacious. This strategy can be an alternative to bridging with enoxaparin or heparin in the periprocedural period.

Periprocedural Stroke and Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation With Different Anticoagulation Management Results From the Role of Coumadin in Preventing Thromboembolism in Atrial Fibrillation (AF) Patients Undergoing Catheter Ablation (COMPARE) Randomized Trial

Background— Periprocedural thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events are worrisome complications of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). The periprocedural anticoagulation management could play a role in the incidence of these complications. Although ablation procedures performed without warfarin discontinuation seem to be associated with lower thromboembolic risk, no randomized study exists. Methods and Results— This was a prospective, open-label, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study assessing the role of continuous warfarin therapy in preventing periprocedural thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events after radiofrequency catheter ablation. Patients with CHADS2 score ≥1 were included. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the off-warfarin or on-warfarin arm. The incidence of thromboembolic events in the 48 hours after ablation was the primary end point of the study. The study enrolled 1584 patients: 790 assigned to discontinue warfarin (group 1) and 794 assigned to continuous warfarin (group 2). No statistical difference in baseline characteristics was observed. There were 39 thromboembolic events (3.7% strokes [n=29] and 1.3% transient ischemic attacks [n=10]) in group 1: two events (0.87%) in patients with paroxysmal AF, 4 (2.3%) in patients with persistent AF, and 33 (8.5%) in patients with long-standing persistent AF. Only 2 strokes (0.25%) in patients with long-standing persistent AF were observed in group 2 (P<0.001). Warfarin discontinuation emerged as a strong predictor of periprocedural thromboembolism (odds ratio, 13; 95% confidence interval, 3.1–55.6; P<0.001). Conclusion— This is the first randomized study showing that performing catheter ablation of AF without warfarin discontinuation reduces the occurrence of periprocedural stroke and minor bleeding complications compared with bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01006876.

Impact of type of atrial fibrillation and repeat catheter ablation on long-term freedom from atrial fibrillation: Results from a multicenter study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE The purpose of this prospective multicenter study was to compare results of catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) and those with nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation (NPAF). The impact and the role of repeat catheter ablation were assessed in patients with recurrence. METHODS/RESULTS One thousand four hundred four patients underwent catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) performed by 12 operators at four institutions using a single technique guided by intracardiac echocardiography. Of these patients, 728 had PAF and 676 had NPAF. Among the NPAF patients, 293 had persistent AF and 383 had long-standing persistent AF. Patients with NPAF had a higher incidence of hypertension and/or structural heart disease (64.8% vs 48.5%, P = .003) and a lower mean left ventricular ejection fraction (53.3% +/- 8.7% vs 55.7 +/- 6.5%, P <.001). All patients underwent antral isolation of all four pulmonary veins and the superior vena cava. At mean follow-up of 57 +/- 17 months, 565 of 728 patients with PAF and 454 of 676 patients with NPAF (77.6% vs 67.2%, P <.001) had freedom from AF after a single ablation procedure. For arrhythmia recurrences, 74.2% (121/163) patients with PAF and 74.8% (166/222) with NPAF underwent repeat ablation, after which 92.4% patients with PAF and 84.0% patients with NPAF remained free from AF. CONCLUSION Pulmonary vein antrum isolation guided by intracardiac echocardiography results in significant freedom from AF, even when performed by multiple operators in different centers. At least moderate efficacy can be achieved in patients with NPAF, although the success rate is lower than in patients with PAF. Considerably higher success can be achieved in both groups with repeat ablation.

Periprocedural Stroke and Bleeding Complications in Patients undergoing Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation with Different Anticoagulation Management: Results from the "COMPARE" Randomized Trial

Background— Periprocedural thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events are worrisome complications of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). The periprocedural anticoagulation management could play a role in the incidence of these complications. Although ablation procedures performed without warfarin discontinuation seem to be associated with lower thromboembolic risk, no randomized study exists. Methods and Results— This was a prospective, open-label, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study assessing the role of continuous warfarin therapy in preventing periprocedural thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events after radiofrequency catheter ablation. Patients with CHADS2 score ≥1 were included. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the off-warfarin or on-warfarin arm. The incidence of thromboembolic events in the 48 hours after ablation was the primary end point of the study. The study enrolled 1584 patients: 790 assigned to discontinue warfarin (group 1) and 794 assigned to continuous warfarin (group 2). No statistical difference in baseline characteristics was observed. There were 39 thromboembolic events (3.7% strokes [n=29] and 1.3% transient ischemic attacks [n=10]) in group 1: two events (0.87%) in patients with paroxysmal AF, 4 (2.3%) in patients with persistent AF, and 33 (8.5%) in patients with long-standing persistent AF. Only 2 strokes (0.25%) in patients with long-standing persistent AF were observed in group 2 (P<0.001). Warfarin discontinuation emerged as a strong predictor of periprocedural thromboembolism (odds ratio, 13; 95% confidence interval, 3.1–55.6; P<0.001). Conclusion— This is the first randomized study showing that performing catheter ablation of AF without warfarin discontinuation reduces the occurrence of periprocedural stroke and minor bleeding complications compared with bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01006876.

Safety and Efficacy of Pulmonary Vein Antral Isolation in Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea The Impact of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure

Background—Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) may be associated with pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI) failure. The aim of the present study was to investigate if treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) improved PVAI success rates. Methods and Results—From January 2004 to December 2007, 3000 consecutive patients underwent PVAI. Patients were screened for OSA and CPAP use. Six hundred forty (21.3%) patients had OSA. Patients with OSA had more procedural failures (P=0.024) and hematomas (P<0.001). Eight percent of the non-OSA paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patients had nonpulmonary vein antrum triggers (non-PV triggers) and posterior wall firing versus 20% of the OSA group (P<0.001). Nineteen percent of the non-OSA nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation population had non-PV triggers versus 31% in the OSA group (P=0.001). At the end of the follow-up period (32±14 months), 79% of the non-CPAP and 68% of the CPAP group were free of atrial fibrillation (P=0.003). Not using CPAP in addition to having non-PV triggers strongly predicted procedural failure (hazard ratio, 8.81; P<0.001). Conclusions—OSA was an independent predictor for PVAI failure. Treatment with CPAP improved PVAI success rates. Patients not treated with CPAP in addition to having higher prevalence of non-PV triggers were 8 times more likely to fail the procedure.

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Strategies for Paroxysmal Patients: randomized comparison between different techniques.

Background— Whether different ablation strategies affect paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) long-term freedom from AF/atrial tachyarrhythmia is unclear. We sought to compare the effect of 3 different ablation approaches on the long-term success in patients with paroxysmal AF. Methods and Results— One hundred three consecutive patients with paroxysmal AF scheduled for ablation and presenting in the electrophysiology laboratory in AF were selected for this study. Patients were randomized to pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI; n=35) versus biatrial ablation of the complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAEs; n=34) versus PVAI followed by CFAEs (n=34). Patients were given event recorders and followed up at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 months postablation. There was no statistical significant difference between the groups in term of sex, age, AF duration, left atrial size, and ejection fraction. At 1 year follow-up, freedom from AF/atrial tachyarrhythmia was documented in 89% of patients in the PVAI group, 91% in the PVAI plus CFAEs group, and 23% in the CFAEs group ( P <0.001) after a single procedure and with antiarrhythmic drugs. Conclusion— No difference in terms of success rate was seen between PVAI alone and PVAI associated with defragmentation. CFAEs ablation alone had the smallest impact on AF recurrences at 1-year follow-up. These results suggest that antral isolation is sufficient to treat most patients with paroxysmal AF. Received March 19, 2008; accepted February 11, 2009. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-2}Background—Whether different ablation strategies affect paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) long-term freedom from AF/atrial tachyarrhythmia is unclear. We sought to compare the effect of 3 different ablation approaches on the long-term success in patients with paroxysmal AF. Methods and Results—One hundred three consecutive patients with paroxysmal AF scheduled for ablation and presenting in the electrophysiology laboratory in AF were selected for this study. Patients were randomized to pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI; n=35) versus biatrial ablation of the complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAEs; n=34) versus PVAI followed by CFAEs (n=34). Patients were given event recorders and followed up at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 months postablation. There was no statistical significant difference between the groups in term of sex, age, AF duration, left atrial size, and ejection fraction. At 1 year follow-up, freedom from AF/atrial tachyarrhythmia was documented in 89% of patients in the PVAI group, 91% in the PVAI plus CFAEs group, and 23% in the CFAEs group (P<0.001) after a single procedure and with antiarrhythmic drugs. Conclusion—No difference in terms of success rate was seen between PVAI alone and PVAI associated with defragmentation. CFAEs ablation alone had the smallest impact on AF recurrences at 1-year follow-up. These results suggest that antral isolation is sufficient to treat most patients with paroxysmal AF.