Adenosine usage during AF ablation in Europe and selected long-term findings from the ESC-EHRA EORP Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term registry

Abstract Aims Monitoring of patients after ablation had wide variations in the ESC-EHRA atrial fibrillation ablation long-term (AFA-LT) registry. We aimed to compare four different monitoring strategies after catheter AF ablation. Methods and results The ESC-EHRA AFA-LT registry included 3593 patients who underwent ablation. Arrhythmia monitoring during follow-up was performed by 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG), Holter ECG, trans-telephonic ECG monitoring (TTMON), or an implanted cardiac monitoring (ICM) system. Patients were selected to a given monitoring group according to the most extensive ECG tool used in each of them. Comparison of the probability of freedom from recurrences was performed by censored log-rank test and presented by Kaplan–Meier curves. The rhythm monitoring methods were used among 2658 patients: ECG (N = 578), Holter ECG (N = 1874), TTMON (N = 101), and ICM (N = 105). A total of 767 of 2658 patients (28.9%) had AF recurrences during follow-up. Censored log-rank test discovered a lower probability of freedom from relapses, which was detected with ICM compared to TTMON, ECG, and Holter ECG (P < 0.001). The rate of freedom from AF recurrences was 50.5% among patients using the ICM while it was 65.4%, 70.6%, and 72.8% using the TTMON, ECG, and Holter ECG, respectively. Conclusion Comparing all main electrocardiographic monitoring methods in a large patient sample, our results suggest that post-ablation recurrences of AF are significantly underreported by TTMON, ECG, and Holter ECG. The ICM estimates AF ablation recurrences most reliably and should be a preferred mode of monitoring for trials evaluating novel AF ablation techniques.

Download Full-text

Which patients with atrial fibrillation undergo an ablation procedure today in Europe? A report from the ESC-EHRA-EORP Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term and Atrial Fibrillation General Pilot Registries

EP Europace ◽

10.1093/europace/euz291 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 22 (2) ◽

pp. 250-258 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Roland Richard Tilz ◽

Nikolaos Dagres ◽

Elena Arbelo ◽

Carina Blomström-Lundqvist ◽

Harry J Crijns ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Atrial Fibrillation ◽

Heart Rhythm ◽

Left Ventricular ◽

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation ◽

Left Ventricular Ejection ◽

Web Based ◽

Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽

Af Ablation ◽

Atrial Size

Abstract Aims Rhythm control management in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) may be unequal across Europe. The aim of this study was to investigate how selective the patient cohort referred for AF ablation is, as compared to the general AF population in Europe, and to describe the governing mechanisms for such selection. Methods and results Descriptive comparative statistical analyses of the baseline characteristics were performed between the cohorts of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term (ESC EORP AFA-LT) registry, designed to provide a picture of contemporary real-world AF ablation, and the AF population from the AF-General (ESC EORP AF-Gen) pilot registry. Data collection was performed using a web-based system. In the AFA and in the Atrial Fibrillation General (AFG) pilot registries, 3593 and 3049 patients were enrolled, respectively. Patients who underwent AF ablation were younger, more commonly male, and had significantly less comorbidities. Atrial Fibrillation Ablation patients often presented without comorbidities, resulting in a lower risk of stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc ≥5: 2.9% vs. 24.5%, all P < 0.001) and bleeding (HAS-BLED ≥2: 8.5% vs. 40.5%, P < 0.001) but with European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) scores >1 and more prevalent AF-related symptoms such as palpitations, fatigue, and weakness (all P < 0.001) as compared to the general AF patients. Atrial Fibrillation Ablation patients were significantly more often male, had higher left ventricular ejection fraction (59.5% vs. 52.4%) and smaller left atrial size on echocardiogram (P < 0.001 each). Conclusion The comparison of the patient cohorts in the AFA and AFG registries showed that AF ablation in European clinical practice is mostly performed in relatively young, symptomatic and relatively healthy patients.

Download Full-text

Impact of centre volume on atrial fibrillation ablation outcomes in Europe: a report from the ESC EHRA EORP Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term (AFA LT) Registry

EP Europace ◽

10.1093/europace/euaa236 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Vassilios P Vassilikos ◽

Efstathios D Pagourelias ◽

Cécile Laroche ◽

Carina Blomström-Lundqvist ◽

Josef Kautzner ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Atrial Fibrillation ◽

Success Rate ◽

Cardiovascular Complications ◽

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation ◽

Complication Rates ◽

Stroke Incidence ◽

Af Ablation ◽

Long Term Study ◽

Low Volume

Abstract Aims The aim of the study was to investigate differences in clinical outcomes and complication rates among European atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation centres related to the volume of AF ablations performed. Methods and results Data for this analysis were extracted from the ESC EHRA EORP European AF Ablation Long-Term Study Registry. Based on 33rd and 67th percentiles of number of AF ablations performed, the participating centres were classified into high volume (HV) (≥ 180 procedures/year), medium volume (MV) (<180 and ≥74/year), and low volume (LV) (<74/year). A total of 91 centres in 26 European countries enrolled in 3368 patients. There was a significantly higher reporting of cardiovascular complications and stroke incidence in LV centres compared with HV and MV (P = 0.039 and 0.008, respectively) and a lower success rate after AF ablation (55.3% in HV vs. 57.2% in LV vs. 67.4% in MV centres, P < 0.001), despite lower CHA2DS2-VASc score of patients, enrolled in LVs and less complex ablation techniques used. Adjustments of confounding factors (including type of AF ablation) led to elimination of these differences. Conclusion Low-volume centres tended to present slightly higher cardiovascular complications’ and stroke incidence and a lower unadjusted success rate after AF ablation, despite the fact that ablation procedures and patients were of lower risk compared with MV and HV centres. On the other hand, adjusted overall complication and recurrence rates were non-significantly different among different volume centres, a fact reflecting the heterogeneity of patient and procedural profiles, and a counterbalance between expertise and risk level among participating centres.

Download Full-text

Catheter-related complications and mortality of atrial fibrillation ablation following introduction of contact force-sensing technology

BMJ Surgery, Interventions, & Health Technologies ◽

10.1136/bmjsit-2020-000058 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

pp. e000058

Author(s):

Joseph G Akar ◽

James P Hummel ◽

Xiaoxi Yao ◽

Lindsey Sangaralingham ◽

Sanket Dhruva ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Atrial Fibrillation ◽

Acute Care ◽

Contact Force ◽

Emergency Department Visits ◽

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation ◽

Esophageal Injury ◽

Force Sensing ◽

Complication Rates ◽

Af Ablation ◽

Complications And Mortality

ObjectivesContact force-sensing catheters allow real-time catheter-tissue contact force monitoring during atrial fibrillation. These catheters were rapidly adopted into clinical practice following market introduction in 2014, but concerns have been raised regarding collateral damage such as esophageal injury. We sought to examine whether the introduction of force-sensing catheters was associated with a change in short-term and intermediate-term acute care use, complications and mortality following atrial fibrillation ablation.DesignRetrospective cohort analysis. We used inverse probability treatment weight matching to account for the differences in baseline characteristics between groups.SettingWe examined patients included in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse who underwent ablation for atrial fibrillation before (2011–2013) and after (2015–2017) the market introduction of contact force-sensing catheters.Main outcome measuresWe examined 30-day and 90-day rates of all-cause acute care use, including hospitalizations and emergency department visits, as well as death and hospitalization for catheter-related complications, including atrioesophageal fistula, pericarditis, cardiac tamponade/perforation and stroke/transient ischemic attack.ResultsOur sample included 3470 and 5772 patients who underwent atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation before and after market introduction of contact force-sensing catheters, respectively. Complication rates were low and did not differ between the two periods (p>0.10 for each outcome). The 30-day and 90-day mortality was 0.1% and 0.3%, respectively after market introduction and unchanged from prior to 2014. The 90-day rates of all-cause acute care use decreased, from 27.0% in 2011–2013 to 23.9% in 2015–2017 (p<0.001).ConclusionsAF ablation-related catheter complications and mortality are low and there has been no significant change following the introduction of force-sensing catheters.

Download Full-text