P5650Improvement in ejection fraction predicts heart failure after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: from the KPAF registry

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
H Fujimoto ◽  
N Doi ◽  
K Hirai ◽  
M Naito ◽  
S Shizuta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Af Ablation ◽  
Study Population ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Introduction The presence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is associated with increased risks of mortality and hospitalization for heart failure (HF). Although prior studies reported that catheter ablation (CA) for AF in low LVEF patients reduced risks of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization, the predictors of worsening HF after ablation has not been adequately evaluated. Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of improvement in LVEF after AF ablation on the incidence of subsequent HF hospitalization in patients with low LVEF. Methods The Kansai Plus Atrial Fibrillation (KPAF) Registry is a multicenter registry enrolling 5,013 consecutive patients undergoing first-time ablation for AF. The current study population consisted of 1,031 patients with reduced LVEF of <60%. We divided the study population into 3 groups according to LVEF at follow-up; 678 patients (65.8%) with improved LVEF (≥5 U change in LVEF), 288 patients (27.9%) with unchanged LVEF (−5 U ≤ change in LVEF <5 U) and 65 patients (6.3%) with worsened LVEF (<−5 U change in LVEF). Results During the median follow-up of 1067 [879–1226] days, patients improved LVEF had lower rate of HF hospitalization, compared with those with unchanged and worsened LVEF (2.1%, 8.0%, and 21.5%, respectively, P<0.0001). Recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias were documented in 43.5%, 47.2% and 67.7%, respectively (P=0.0008). Figure 1 Conclusion Among patients with reduced LVEF undergoing AF ablation, patients with subsequently improved LVEF in association with maintained sinus rhythm had markedly lower risk of HF hospitalization during follow-up as compared with those with unchanged or worsened LVEF.

scholarly journals Catheter ablation of nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and functional mitral regurgitation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teng Li ◽  
Jun Huang ◽  
Jian Liang ◽  
Wenjie Peng ◽  
Ligang Ding ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Mitral Regurgitation ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Functional Mitral Regurgitation ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction

Abstract Background The optimal treatment for patients with nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been a subject of debate for years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation (CA) of nonparoxysmal AF in patients with HFrEF and functional mitral regurgitation (MR). Methods This single-center, retrospective, and observational study enrolled 21 consecutive patients with nonparoxysmal AF, HFrEF and functional MR underwent CA༎The ablation strategy consisted of bilateral circumferential pulmonary vein isolation and empirical linear ablations. Results After a mean follow-up of 18.2 ± 8.5 months, stable sinus rhythm (SR) was achieved in 15 patients (71.4%) after the initial procedure and 17 patients (81%) after the final procedure. The NYHA class improved from 2.7 ± 0.7 before ablation to 1.2 ± 0.4 during follow-up (p < 0.001). Left ventricular ejection fraction increased from 36.5 ± 6.3% to 54.9 ± 6.6% (p < 0.001). Among 17 patients in continuous SR after the final procedure, MR severity decreased to mild or none,and 10 patients with decreased ventricular wall motion was completely restored to normal after the procedure. No serious complications occurred. Conclusion CA may be a safe and effective method for treating nonparoxysmal AF in patients with HFrEF and functional MR. It can significantly improve HF symptoms, functional MR and left ventricular function..

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Ischemic versus Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy after Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibition Therapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (21) ◽  
pp. 4989
Author(s):  
Mohammad Abumayyaleh ◽  
Christina Pilsinger ◽  
Ibrahim El-Battrawy ◽  
Marvin Kummer ◽  
Jürgen Kuschyk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ischemic Cardiomyopathy ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
One Year ◽  
The Impact

Background: The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) decreases cardiovascular mortality in patients with chronic heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Data regarding the impact of ARNI on the outcome in HFrEF patients according to heart failure etiology are limited. Methods and results: One hundred twenty-one consecutive patients with HFrEF from the years 2016 to 2017 were included at the Medical Centre Mannheim Heidelberg University and treated with ARNI according to the current guidelines. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was numerically improved during the treatment with ARNI in both patient groups, that with ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 61) (ICMP), and that with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 60) (NICMP); p = 0.25. Consistent with this data, the NT-proBNP decreased in both groups, more commonly in the NICMP patient group. In addition, the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and creatinine changed before and after the treatment with ARNI in both groups. In a one-year follow-up, the rate of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation) tended to be higher in the ICMP group compared with the NICMP group (ICMP 38.71% vs. NICMP 17.24%; p = 0.07). The rate of one-year all-cause mortality was similar in both groups (ICMP 6.5% vs. NICMP 6.6%; log-rank = 0.9947). Conclusions: This study shows that, although the treatment with ARNI improves the LVEF in ICMP and NICMP patients, the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias remains higher in ICMP patients in comparison with NICMP patients. Renal function is improved in the NICMP group after the treatment. Long-term mortality is similar over a one-year follow-up.

Abstract 15303: The Impact of Heart Rate on the Incidence of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Chronic Atrial Fibrillation: The Fushimi Af Registry

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Moritake Iguchi ◽  
Hisashi Ogawa ◽  
Hirofumi Sugiyama ◽  
Nobutoyo Masunaga ◽  
Mitsuru Ishii ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Chronic Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
The Impact

Purpose: Previous reports suggested that lenient rate control was not inferior to strict rate control among patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the impact of heart rate (HR) on the incidence of cardiovascular events is not clearly understood. Methods: The Fushimi AF Registry, a community-based prospective survey, was designed to enroll all of the AF patients in Fushimi-ku, Kyoto, Japan. At present, follow-up data were available in 3,514 patients (median follow-up period, 842 days). 1,622 patients had chronic AF, and we obtained ECG findings in 1,561 patients. We divided these patients into three groups based on their heart rate; high-HR (HR≥110) (n=179), intermediate-HR (80≤HR<110) (n=695), and low-HR (HR<80) (n=687), and explored the cardiovascular events (composite of cardiovascular death, hospitalization for heart failure, and arrhythmic events). Results: Mean HR was 128±13 bpm, 93±8 bpm, and 67±9 bpm, respectively. High HR group was younger than other groups, but the prevalence of heart failure was the highest (44.7%, 37.0%, 32.3%; p=0.007) and left-ventricular ejection fraction was the lowest (56.5±14.6%, 60.7±11.9%, 62.7±10.5%; p<0.0001). Prescription of beta-blocker (37.4%, 28.9%, 30.0%) and diltiazem (2.8%, 2.9%, 4.2%) was comparable, but prescription of verapamil was the highest in high-HR group (19.0%, 12.4%, 8.0%; p=0.0001), and prescription of digitalis was the highest in low-HR group (14.0%, 18.2%, 23.4%; p=0.005). Mean CHADS2 score was 2.3±1.3, 2.2±1.3, and 2.2±1.4, respectively. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, the incidence of cardiovascular events was higher in high-HR groups than intermediate- and low-HR group (9.2%/year vs 5.8%/year, p=0.02), but was similar between intermediate- and low-HR group (6.2%/year vs 5.4%/year, p=0.3). The incidence of stroke or systemic embolism was comparable between the three groups (2.6%/year, 3.6%/year, 2.4%/year). Cox proportional hazard ratios [95%CI] of high- and intermediate-HR for cardiovascular events compared to low-HR were 1.63 [1.06-2.44] and 1.10 [0.81-1.79], respectively. Conclusions: Among chronic AF patients, the incidence of cardiovascular events was higher in the patients with high-HR, but was similar between intermediate- and low-HR groups.

Abstract 17223: Castle of Stone or Straw, Radiofrequency Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure?

Circulation ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 138 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian D McCauley ◽  
Esseim Sharma ◽  
John Dudley ◽  
Antony Chu
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Sinus Rhythm ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Prospective Trials

Introduction: Based on the data from CASTLE-AF trial, in patient with Atrial Fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) catheter ablation may offer a significant reduction in both death, and hospitalization, while promoting maintenance of sinus rhythm as well as improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). This multi-center randomized trial is hailed as a paradigm shifting study in catheter ablation, however it is not without fault. One of the critiques of the CASTLE-AF trial was the high frequency of crossover between the treatment arms. To help sort out this potential source of confounding, we performed a systematic meta-analysis of prospective trials for catheter ablation in AF in patients with Class II through IV heart failure. Hypothesis: The reduction in death, and hospitalization, as well as the maintenance in sinus rhythm and improvement in LVEF seen CASTLE-AF trial are support by other similarly designed AF ablation trials. Methods: Using the inclusion/exclusion criteria from the CASTLE-AF trial, we performed a systematic meta-analysis of 28 published studies. Randomized and non-randomized observational studies comparing the impact of catheter ablation of AF in HF. Studies were identified using the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed. Results: A total of 29 studies were identified (n =2,339). Mean follow-up was 25 (95% confidence interval, 18-40) months. Efficacy in maintaining sinus rhythm at follow-up end was 60% (43%-76%). Left ventricular ejection fraction improved significantly during follow-up by 15% (P<0.001). Conclusions: Following our meta-analysis, we found data to support the findings of improved LVEF and maintenance of sinus rhythm reported in the CASTLE-AF trial. However, due to differences in study design, we were unable to further validate the reduction in both hospitalization and death seen in CASTLE-AF. We recommend future prospective trials be conducted without cross over to further explore this topic.

scholarly journals Meta-Analysis of Catheter Ablation versus Medical Therapy for Heart Failure Complicated with Atrial Fibrillation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Xi Zhu ◽  
Yingbiao Wu ◽  
Zhongping Ning
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Objective. To compare the efficacy of catheter ablation and medical therapy in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Methods. We searched randomized controlled trials comparing catheter ablation versus medical therapy for heart failure and atrial fibrillation through PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Clinical Trials Database, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. Articles were investigated for their methodological quality using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of the bias assessment tool. Forest plots, funnel plots, and sensitivity analysis were also performed on the included articles. Results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals. Results. Nine (9) studies were included in this study with 1131 patients. Meta-analysis showed a reduction in all-cause mortality from catheter ablation compared with medical therapy (RR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.37 to 0.76; P = 0.0007 ) and improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (MD = 6.45, 95% CI = 3.49 to 9.41; P < 0.0001 ), 6-minute walking time (6MWT) (MD = 28.32, 95% CI = 17.77 to 38.87; P < 0.0001 ), and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) score (MD = 8.19, 95% CI = 0.30 to 16.08; P = 0.04 ). Conclusion. Catheter ablation had a better improvement than medical treatment in left ventricular ejection fraction, cardiac function, and exercise ability for atrial fibrillation and heart failure patients.

scholarly journals 254 Impact of sacubitril/valsartan on implantable defibrillator eligibility in heart failure: a real-world experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_G) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Monzo ◽  
Ilaria Ferrari ◽  
Carlo Gaudio ◽  
Francesco Cicogna ◽  
Claudia Tota ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Nyha Class ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Reverse Remodelling ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Aims Current guidelines recommend an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) in patients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction [HFrEF; left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%] despite ≥3 months of optimal medical therapy. Recent observations demonstrated that sacubitril/valsartan induces beneficial reverse cardiac remodelling in eligible HFrEF patients. Given the pivotal role of LVEF in the selection of ICD candidates, we sought to assess the impact of sacubitril/valsartan on ICD eligibility and its predictors in HFrEF patients. Methods and results We retrospectively evaluated 48 chronic HFrEF patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan and previously implanted with an ICD in primary prevention. We assumed that ICD was no longer necessary if LVEF improved &gt;35% (or &gt; 30% in asymptomatics) at follow-up. Over a median follow-up of 11 months, sacubitril/valsartan induced a significant drop in LV end-systolic volume (−16.7 ml/m2, P = 0.023) and diameter (−6.8 mm, P = 0.022), resulting in a significant increase in LVEF (+3.9%, P &lt; 0.001). As a consequence, 40% of previously implanted patients resulted no more eligible for ICD at follow-up. NYHA class improved in the 50% of population. A dose-dependent effect was noted, with higher doses associated to more reverse remodelling. Among patients deemed no more eligible for ICD, lower NYHA class [odds ratio (OR): 3.73 (95% CI: 1.05–13.24), P = 0.041], better LVEF [OR: 1.23 (95% CI: 1.01–1.48), P = 0.032], and the treatment with the intermediate or high dose of sacubitril/valsartan [OR: 5.60 (1.15–27.1), P = 0.032] were the most important predictors of status change. Conclusions In symptomatic HFrEF patients, sacubitril/valsartan induced beneficial cardiac reverse remodelling and improved NYHA class. These effects resulted in a significant reduction of patients deemed eligible for ICD in primary prevention.

scholarly journals The Impact of HbA1c level on heart failure with recovered rjection fraction in patients with Type 2 Diabetes

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
C.D Yang ◽  
X.Q Wang
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Hba1c Level ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Absolute Increase ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Heart failure (HF) with improved or recovered ejection fraction (EF, HFrecEF) has been recognized as a new type of HF with different underlying clinical phenotype, pathophysiology and prognosis. However, few studies have analyzed the relationship between type 2 diabetes and HFrecEF, and the impact of glycemic level on myocardial function recovery. Purpose In the present study, we sought to investigate the relation between HbA1c level and HFrecEF in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods A total of 796 HF patients with reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, &lt;40%) and type 2 diabetes were consecutively enrolled from August 2012 to July 2020. During follow-up for up to 24 months, patients were classified into HFrecEF for whom developed recovered LVEF (≥40% and absolute increase ≥5%) and HFrEF for whose LVEF was persistently reduced (&lt;40%). The relation between HbA1c and the recovery of LV function was analyzed. Results HF patients with type 2 diabetes had significantly lower rates of LVEF recovery when having higher versus lower HbA1c levels in the baseline (the lowest tertile: 62.4%, intermediate tertile: 50.4%, the highest tertile: 46.8%; P&lt;0.001). There were stepwise decreases in changes of LVEF (P&lt;0.001) and increases in changes of LV end-systolic diameter (LVESD; P=0.093) with increasing tertiles of LVEF during follow-up. In the subgroup analysis, the impact of HbA1c on LVEF recovery was more prominent in patients with ischemic heart disease (P&lt;0.001) than those with dilated cardiomyopathy (P=0.536). A significant interaction term was present between HbA1c and etiology of heart failure with regard to LVEF recovery (P=0.012). After multivariate adjustment of conventional confounding factors, high HbA1c level remained to be an independent risk factor lower incidence of HFrecEF in patients type 2 diabetes. Conclusions Our study suggests that optimal glycemic control is an independent predictor for incidence of HFrecEF in patients with type 2 diabetes. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): National Natural Science Foundation of China, Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning

Left atrial fibrosis predicts left ventricular ejection fraction response after atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients: the Fibrosis-HF Study

EP Europace ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (12) ◽  
pp. 1812-1821
Author(s):  
Bettina Kirstein ◽  
Sebastian Neudeck ◽  
Thomas Gaspar ◽  
Judith Piorkowski ◽  
Simon Wechselberger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Atrial ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Atrial Fibrosis ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Af Ablation ◽  
Left Atrial Fibrosis

Abstract Aims Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) often coexist. Catheter ablation has been reported to restore left ventricular (LV) function but patients benefit differently. This study investigated the correlation between left atrial (LA) fibrosis extent and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) recovery after AF ablation. Methods and results In this study, 103 patients [64 years, 69% men, 79% persistent AF, LVEF 33% interquartile range (IQR) (25–38)] undergoing first time AF ablation were investigated. Identification of LA fibrosis and selection of ablation strategy were based on sinus rhythm voltage mapping. Continuous rhythm monitoring was used to assess ablation success. Improvement in post-ablation LVEF was measured as primary study endpoint. An absolute increase in post-ablation LVEF ≥10% was defined as ‘Super Response’. Left atrial fibrosis was present in 38% of patients. After ablation LVEF increased by absolute 15% (IQR 6–25) (P &lt; 0.001). Left ventricular ejection fraction improvement was higher in patients without LA fibrosis [15% (IQR 10–25) vs. 10% (IQR 0–20), P &lt; 0.001]. An inverse correlation between LVEF improvement and the extent of LA fibrosis was found (R2 = 0.931). In multivariate analysis, the presence of LA fibrosis was the only independent predictor for failing LVEF improvement [odds ratio 7.2 (95% confidence interval 2.2–23.4), P &lt; 0.001]. Echocardiographic ‘Super Response’ was observed in 55/64 (86%) patients without and 21/39 (54%) patients with LA fibrosis, respectively (P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion Presence and extent of LA fibrosis predict LVEF response in HF patients undergoing AF ablation. The assessment of LA fibrosis may impact prognostic stratification and clinical management in HF patients with AF.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document