scholarly journals Limited Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Using Preprocedure Reverse Remodelling

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 101 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Slotwiner ◽  
Jonathan Steinberg ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Pulmonary Vein ◽  
Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Persistent Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Tissue Remodelling ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Atrial Tissue ◽  
Reverse Remodelling

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has been demonstrated to be a highly effective treatment option for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), but less effective for patients with persistent AF. The lower efficacy of PVI alone has been attributed to adverse atrial electrical and structural remodelling in the setting of AF. Strategies to improve efficacy of catheter ablation for persistent AF alter these pathophysiological characteristics of atrial tissue remodelling. Here we will review the physiology of atrial electrical remodelling observed during AF and evidence that it is reversible. Further, we will explore its uses to reduce the amount of atrial tissue that needs to be ablated to successfully treat patients with persistent AF.

scholarly journals Longstanding Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: How Do You Perform It?

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-95
Author(s):  
Carola Gianni ◽  
Andrea Natale ◽  
Amin Al-Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Case Report ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Pulmonary Vein ◽  
Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation ◽  
Persistent Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Posterior Wall ◽  
Ablation Procedure ◽  
First Time

Longstanding-persistent atrial fibrillation is one of the most challenging arrhythmias to treat. While radiofrequency catheter ablation is highly effective in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, pulmonary vein antral isolation (including posterior wall isolation) alone is not enough for nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation, other targets should be sought in this population. In this case report, we will describe our approach in a typical patient presenting for a first-time ablation procedure for longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation.

Catheter ablation for lone atrial fibrillation in individuals aged under 35 years

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 643-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jindong Chen ◽  
Hao Wang ◽  
Mengmeng Zhou ◽  
Liang Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Pulmonary Vein ◽  
Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation ◽  
Atrial Tachyarrhythmia ◽  
Lone Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Significant Independent Predictor ◽  
Atrial Size

AbstractBackground:To assess the effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation for lone atrial fibrillation in young adults.Methods:This single-centre, retrospective, observational study enrolled 75 consecutive patients (86.7% men) under 35 (median, 30) years old with lone atrial fibrillation (68% paroxysmal, 26.7% persistent, and 5.3% long-standing persistent) without other cardiopulmonary diseases who underwent catheter ablation between April 2009 and May 2017. Procedural endpoints were circumferential pulmonary vein ablation for atrial fibrillation with pulmonary vein trigger, and target ablation or bidirectional block of lines and disappearance of complex fractionated atrial electrograms for atrial fibrillation with clear and unclear non-pulmonary vein triggers, respectively.Results:Main study outcome was rate of survival free from atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence, which at median 61 (range, 5–102) months follow-up was 62.7% (64.7 and 58.3% for paroxysmal and non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, respectively) after single ablation, and 69.3% (68.6 and 70.8% for paroxysmal and non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, respectively) after mean 1.2 ablations (two and three ablations in 11 and 2 patients, respectively). In multivariate analysis, non-pulmonary vein trigger was a significant independent predictor of recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia (OR, 10.60 [95%CI, 2.25–49.96]; p = 0.003). There were no major periprocedural adverse events.Conclusions:In patients under 35 years old with lone atrial fibrillation, radiofrequency catheter ablation appeared effective particularly for atrial fibrillation with pulmonary vein trigger and regardless of left atrial size or atrial fibrillation duration or type. Atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence after multiple ablations warrants further study.

Pulmonary vein isolation alone vs. more extensive ablation with defragmentation and linear ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation: the EARNEST-PVI trial

EP Europace ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koichi Inoue ◽  
Shungo Hikoso ◽  
Masaharu Masuda ◽  
Yoshio Furukawa ◽  
Akio Hirata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Pulmonary Vein ◽  
Pulmonary Vein Isolation ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Persistent Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Inferior Margin ◽  
Linear Ablation

Abstract Aims Previous studies could not demonstrate any benefit of more intensive ablation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) including complex fractionated atrial electrogram (CFAE) and linear ablation for recurrence in the initial catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to establish the non-inferiority of PVI alone to PVI plus these additional ablation strategies. Methods and results Patients with persistent AF who underwent an initial catheter ablation (n = 512, long-standing persistent AF; 128 cases) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either PVI alone (PVI-alone group) or PVI plus CFAE and/or linear ablation (PVI-plus group). After excluding 15 cases who did not receive procedures, we analysed 249 and 248 patients, respectively. The primary endpoint was recurrence of AF, atrial flutter, and/or atrial tachycardia, and the non-inferior margin was set at a hazard ratio of 1.43. In the PVI-plus group, 85.1% of patients had linear ablation and 15.3% CFAE ablation. After 12 months, freedom from the primary endpoint occurred in 71.3% of patients in the PVI-alone group and in 78.3% in the PVI-plus group [hazard ratio = 1.56 (95% confidence interval: 1.10–2.24), non-inferior P = 0.3062]. The procedure-related complication rates were 2.0% in the PVI-alone group and 3.6% in the PVI-plus group (P = 0.199). Conclusion This randomized trial did not establish the non-inferiority of PVI alone to PVI plus linear ablation or CFAE ablation in patients with persistent AF, but implied that the PVI plus strategy was promising to improve the clinical efficacy (NCT03514693).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document