Heart rhythm · 2024
Duration of atrial fibrillation persistence: Implications for recurrence risk after catheter ablation and efficacy of additional substrate ablation.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Matsunaga-Lee Yasuharu, Inoue Koichi, Tanaka Nobuaki, Masuda Masaharu, Watanabe Tetsuya, Makino Nobuhiko, Egami Yasuyuki, Oka Takafumi, Minamiguchi Hitoshi, Miyoshi Miwa, Okada Masato, Kanda Takashi, Matsuda Yasuhiro, Kawasaki Masato, Kawanami Shodai, Ukita Kohei, Kawamura Akito, Yasumoto Koji, Tsuda Masaki, Okamoto Naotaka, Yano Masamichi, Nishino Masami, Sunaga Akihiro, Sotomi Yohei, Dohi Tomoharu, Nakatani Daisaku, Hikoso Shungo, Sakata Yasushi, Osaka Cardiovascular Conference (OCVC)–Arrhythmia Investigators
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of atrial fibrillation (AF) persistence for predicting poor outcomes after catheter ablation of long-standing AF (LsAF) and the best ablation strategy for these patients remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the impact of the duration of AF persistence on outcomes after catheter ablation of AF.
METHODS: We analyzed the Efficacy of Pulmonary Vein Isolation Alone in Patients with Persistent Atrial Fibrillation (EARNEST-PVI) trial data comparing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone (PVI-alone) with additional linear ablation or defragmentation (PVI-plus) in persistent AF (PerAF). Patients who received catheter ablation by contact force-sensing catheter were enrolled in the study. In patients with LsAF, the optimal cutoff duration of AF persistence was evaluated. With use of the threshold, patients with LsAF were divided into 2 groups and compared with PerAF <1 year for arrhythmia-free survival after a 3-month blanking period.
RESULTS: The optimal cutoff duration was 2.4 years. Of 458 patients, arrhythmia-free survival rates for LsAF 1-2.4 years were comparable to those of PerAF (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.67-1.52). However, LsAF >2.4 years had a higher recurrence risk than PerAF (HR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.42-3.47). In LsAF >2.4 years, the PVI-plus strategy showed advantages over the PVI-alone strategy (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14-0.89). However, the interaction effect between LsAF 1-2.4 years and LsAF >2.4 years did not reach statistical significance (P = .116).
CONCLUSION: Whereas LsAF 1-2.4 years has similar outcomes to those of PerAF, LsAF >2.4 years was linked to higher arrhythmia recurrence risks. For LsAF >2.4 years, the PVI-plus strategy showed a potential to be superior to the PVI-alone strategy.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the impact of the duration of AF persistence on outcomes after catheter ablation of AF.
METHODS: We analyzed the Efficacy of Pulmonary Vein Isolation Alone in Patients with Persistent Atrial Fibrillation (EARNEST-PVI) trial data comparing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone (PVI-alone) with additional linear ablation or defragmentation (PVI-plus) in persistent AF (PerAF). Patients who received catheter ablation by contact force-sensing catheter were enrolled in the study. In patients with LsAF, the optimal cutoff duration of AF persistence was evaluated. With use of the threshold, patients with LsAF were divided into 2 groups and compared with PerAF <1 year for arrhythmia-free survival after a 3-month blanking period.
RESULTS: The optimal cutoff duration was 2.4 years. Of 458 patients, arrhythmia-free survival rates for LsAF 1-2.4 years were comparable to those of PerAF (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.67-1.52). However, LsAF >2.4 years had a higher recurrence risk than PerAF (HR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.42-3.47). In LsAF >2.4 years, the PVI-plus strategy showed advantages over the PVI-alone strategy (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14-0.89). However, the interaction effect between LsAF 1-2.4 years and LsAF >2.4 years did not reach statistical significance (P = .116).
CONCLUSION: Whereas LsAF 1-2.4 years has similar outcomes to those of PerAF, LsAF >2.4 years was linked to higher arrhythmia recurrence risks. For LsAF >2.4 years, the PVI-plus strategy showed a potential to be superior to the PVI-alone strategy.