Effect of left atrial appendage excision on procedure outcome in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation undergoing surgical ablation

Interventions to prevent postoperative atrial fibrillation in Dutch cardiothoracic centres: a survey study

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is a common phenomenon following cardiac surgery. In this study, we assessed current preventive strategies used by Dutch cardiothoracic centres, identified common views on this matter and related these to international guidelines.

METHODS

We developed an online questionnaire and sent it to all cardiothoracic surgery centres in the Netherlands. The questionnaire concerned the management of POAF and the use of pharmaceutical therapies (beta-blockers and calcium antagonists) and non-pharmaceutical methods (posterior left pericardiotomy, pericardial flushing and epicardial botulinum toxin type A injections). Usage of electrical cardioversions, anticoagulants and left atrial appendage closure were also enquired.

RESULTS

Of the 15 centres, 14 (93%) responded to the survey and 13 reported a POAF incidence, ranging from 20 to 30%. Of these 14 centres, 6 prescribed preoperative AF prophylaxis to their patients, of which non-sotalol beta-blockers were prescribed most commonly (57%). Postoperative medication was administered by all centres and included non-sotalol beta-blockers (38%), sotalol (24%), digoxin (14%), calcium antagonists (13%) and amiodarone (10%). Only 2 centres used posterior left pericardiotomy or pericardial flushing as surgical manoeuvres to prevent POAF. Moreover, respondents expressed the need for guidance on anticoagulant use.

CONCLUSION

Despite the use of various preventive strategies, the reported incidence of POAF was similar in Dutch cardiothoracic centres. This study highlights limited use of prophylactic amiodarone and colchicine, despite recommendations by numerous guidelines, and restricted implementation of surgical strategies to prevent POAF.

Surgical management of atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and recommendations

AIMS

Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has been demonstrated to be a safe procedure conducted concomitantly alongside cardiac surgery. However, there are conflicting guideline recommendations surrounding indications for surgical ablation. We conducted a systematic review of current recommendations on concomitant surgical AF ablation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We identified publications from MEDLINE and EMBASE between January 2011 and December 2022 and additionally searched Guideline libraries and websites of relevant organizations in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Of 895 studies screened, 4 were rigorously developed (AGREE-II > 50%) and included. All guidelines agreed on the definitions of paroxysmal, persistent, and longstanding AF based on duration and refraction to current treatment modalities. In the Australia-New Zealand (CSANZ) and European (EACTS) guidelines, opportunistic screening for patients >65 years is recommended. The EACTS recommends systematic screening for those aged >75 or at high stroke risk (Class IIa, Level B). However, this was not recommended by American Heart Association or Society of Thoracic Surgeons guidelines. All guidelines identified surgical AF ablation during concomitant cardiac surgery as safe and recommended for consideration by a Heart Team with notable variation in recommendation strength and the specific indication (three guidelines fail to specify any indication for surgery). Only the STS recommended left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) alongside surgical ablation (Class IIa, Level C).

CONCLUSION

Disagreements exist in recommendations for specific indications for concomitant AF ablation and LAAO, with the decision subject to Heart Team assessment. Further evidence is needed to develop recommendations for specific indications for concomitant AF procedures and guidelines need to be made congruent.

Non-Pharmacological Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide. It is associated with increased mortality and morbidity, especially due to the increased risk of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism in these patients. For this reason, thromboembolism prevention is the cornerstone of managing AF, and oral anticoagulation is nowadays the first-line treatment. However, since most thrombi form in the left atrial appendage and anticoagulant therapy may have side effects and be contraindicated in some patients, surgical and percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) have emerged as a non-pharmacological alternative. This review summarizes all existing evidence on surgical and percutaneous LAAO.

Left Atrial Appendage Exclusion in Atrial Fibrillation Radiofrequency Ablation during Mitral Valve Surgery: A Single-Center Experience

Background

Atrial fibrillation surgical radiofrequency ablation (AFSA) during mitral valve surgery (MVS) has almost completely superseded the Cox-Maze procedure for the treatment of atrial fibrillation.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 100 patients who underwent MVS + AFSA in our institution from January 2008 to June 2017. We compared the effectiveness of AFSA in patients who underwent LAA exclusion to those who did not. Moreover, we analyzed the role of preoperative AF duration (≤ or >1 year) and medial-lateral left atrial dimensions (ML-LAD) (≤ or >6 cm). The efficacy endpoint was freedom from AF at discharge and at 2-year follow-up. The safety endpoints were need of a permanent pacemaker (PMK), surgical re-exploration, occurrence of stroke, and left circumflex artery or esophageal lesions.

Results

Overall, the rate of AF freedom was 69% at discharge and 80% at 2-year follow-up. LAA exclusion did not influence AF freedom at 2-year follow-up, and 84.6% of patients who underwent LAA exclusion were in the sinus rythm (SR) at 2 year compared to 75% of those who did not receive LAA exclusion free from AF as well (p=0.230). AF duration ≤1 or >1 year did not influence sinus rhythm (SR) maintenance (85.7% vs. 75.8%; p=0.224), and in these two groups, LAA exclusion did not change the efficacy of AFSA. ML-LAD ≤ 6 cm was associated with better results in terms of SR maintenance. A statistically significant association between LAA exclusion and SR maintenance at 2-year follow-up (p=0.017) was found among patients with ML-LAD ≤ 6 cm. Complications included 7 cases of PMK implantation, 2 cases of surgical re-exploration, and 1 case of stroke. No circumflex artery or esophageal lesions occurred after surgical procedures.

Conclusions

In our experience, AFSA during isolated MVS resulted in good outcomes in terms of SR maintenance and incidence of complications. AF duration ≤ 1 year did not influence results, while patients with ML-LAD ≤ 6 cm had significantly better results regarding SR at follow-up. In patients with ML-LAD ≤ 6 cm, LAA exclusion significantly increased the success rate of SR maintenance at 2-year follow-up.

First-line treatment of persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation with single-stage hybrid ablation: a 2-year follow-up study

Aims

This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of first-line single-stage hybrid ablation of (long-standing) persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), over a follow-up period of 2 years, and provides additional information on arrhythmia recurrences and electrophysiological findings at repeat ablation.

Methods and results

This is a prospective cohort study that included 49 patients (65% persistent AF; 35% long-standing persistent AF) who underwent hybrid ablation as first-line ablation treatment (no previous endocardial ablation). Patients were relatively young (57.0 ± 8.5 years) and predominantly male (89.8%). Median CHA₂DS₂-VASc score was 1.0 (0.5; 2.0) and mean left atrium volume index was 43.7 ± 10.9 mL/m². Efficacy was assessed by 12-lead electrocardiography and 72-h Holter monitoring after 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Recurrence was defined as AF/atrial flutter (AFL)/tachycardia (AT) recorded by electrocardiography or Holter monitoring lasting >30 s during 2-year follow-up. At 2-year follow-up, single and multiple procedure success rates were 67% and 82%, respectively. Two (4%) patients experienced a major complication (bleeding) requiring intervention following hybrid ablation. Among the 16 (33%) patients who experienced an AF/AFL/AT recurrence, 13 (81%) were ATs/AFLs and only 3 (19%) were AF. Repeat ablation was performed in 10 (20%) patients and resulted in sinus rhythm in 7 (70%) at 2-year follow-up.

Conclusion

First-line single-stage hybrid AF ablation is an effective treatment strategy for patients with persistent and long-standing persistent AF with an acceptable rate of major complications. Recurrences are predominantly AFL/AT that can be successfully ablated percutaneously. Hybrid ablation seems a feasible approach for first-line ablation of (long-standing) persistent AF.

Early experience of thoracoscopic vs. catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

Aims

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) ablation has been advocated as a treatment option for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) in recent guidelines. Real-life data on its safety and efficacy during a centre’s early experience are sparse.

Methods and results

Thirty patients (28 persistent/longstanding persistent AF) underwent standalone VATS ablation for AF by an experienced thoracoscopic surgeon, with the first 20 cases proctored by external surgeons. Procedural and follow-up outcomes were collected prospectively, and compared with 90 propensity-matched patients undergoing contemporaneous catheter ablation (CA). Six (20.0%) patients undergoing VATS ablation experienced ≥1 major complication (death n = 1, stroke n = 2, conversion to sternotomy n = 3, and phrenic nerve injury n = 2). This was significantly higher than the 1.1% major complication rate (tamponade requiring drainage n = 1) seen with CA (P < 0.001). Twelve-month single procedure arrhythmia-free survival rates without antiarrhythmic drugs were 56% in the VATS and 57% in the CA cohorts (P = 0.22), and 78% and 80%, respectively given an additional CA and antiarrhythmic drugs (P = 0.32).

Conclusion

During a centre’s early experience, VATS ablation may have similar success rates to those from an established CA service, but carry a greater risk of major complications. Those embarking on a programme of VATS AF ablation should be aware that complication and success rates may differ from those reported by selected high-volume centres.

Subxiphoid Hybrid Epicardial-Endocardial Atrial Fibrillation Ablation and LAA Ligation: Initial Sub-X Hybrid MAZE Registry Results

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a new subxiphoid hybrid epicardial-endocardial atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and left atrial appendage (LAA) ligation approach for the treatment of persistent AF.

BACKGROUND

Surgical hybrid ablation procedures have shown promise for maintaining sinus rhythm versus catheter ablation but are associated with increased periprocedural adverse events.

METHODS

Patients with symptomatic persistent AF (n = 33, mean age 64 ± 9 years, 25 men) who had antiarrhythmic drug therapy or prior catheter ablation was unsuccessful were referred for hybrid epicardial-endocardial AF ablation and LAA exclusion. LAA closure was confirmed by transesophageal echocardiographic Doppler flow and/or computed tomographic angiography 1 to 3 months post-ligation. The incidence of atrial tachycardia or AF recurrence, LAA closure, thromboembolic events, and post-operative complications were assessed.

RESULTS

All 33 patients underwent successful LAA ligation with epicardial ablation of the posterior left atrial wall, as well as endocardial pulmonary vein isolation and cavotricuspid isthmus ablation. Freedom from atrial tachycardia or AF was 91% (20 of 22 patients) at 6 months, 90% (18 of 20 patients) at 12 months, 92% (11 of 12 patients) at 18 months, and 92% (11 of 12) at 24 months. There were no acute periprocedural complications (<7 days). Thirty-day adverse events included 2 patients with pericardial effusion requiring pericardiocentesis and 1 incisional hernia repair. There were no long-term complications, strokes, or deaths. LAA ligation was complete in 27 of 33 subjects (82%), with 6 subjects having leaks of <5 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

Subxiphoid hybrid epicardial-endocardial ablation with LAA ligation is feasible, safe, and effective. Future prospective studies are needed to validate these initial findings.

Surgical Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: Cutting Through the Edges

Medical management of atrial fibrillation can be complex, challenging and requiring time to prove its effectiveness; furthermore, the response can be refractory and inconsistent if the underlying pathology is not permanently addressed. Surgical ablation has become a key intervention, and since its first intervention in 1987 (the Cox-maze procedure), the technique has evolved from a conventional open method to a minimally invasive technique whilst retaining excellent outcomes. Furthermore, recent advances in the use of a hybrid approach have been established as satisfactory approach in managing atrial fibrillation with satisfactory outcomes.

This literature review focuses on the evidence behind the surgical success in managing atrial fibrillation throughout the past, present and the future of these surgical interventions.

Current State of Surgical Left Atrial Appendage Exclusion: How and When

Left atrial appendage exclusion is efficacious for stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation. Surgical excision provides reliable left atrial appendage exclusion, whereas surgical occlusion does not. Specifically, 2-layer internal suture ligation has a high failure rate. Left atrial appendage exclusion concomitant to another cardiac surgical procedure is indicated in patients with atrial fibrillation but not in patients without baseline atrial fibrillation. Studies currently underway will further define the role of concomitant surgical left atrial appendage exclusion, especially for the population without baseline atrial fibrillation but at high risk of developing postoperative atrial fibrillation.

Percutaneous versus thoracoscopic ablation of symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomised controlled trial - the FAST II study

BACKGROUND

The most efficient first-time invasive treatment, for achieving sinus rhythm, in symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation has not been established. We aimed to compare percutaneous catheter and video-assisted thoracoscopic pulmonary vein radiofrequency ablation in patients referred for first-time invasive treatment due to symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. The primary outcome of interest was the prevalence of atrial fibrillation with and without anti-arrhythmic drugs at 12 months.

METHODS

Ninety patients were planned to be randomised to either video-assisted thoracoscopic radiofrequency pulmonary vein ablation with concomitant left atrial appendage excision or percutaneous catheter pulmonary vein ablation. Episodes of atrial fibrillation were defined as more than 30 s of atrial fibrillation observed on Holter monitoring/telemetry or clinical episodes documented by ECG.

RESULTS

The study was terminated prematurely due to a lack of eligible patients. Only 21 patients were randomised and treated according to the study protocol. Thoracoscopic pulmonary vein ablation was performed in 10 patients, and 11 patients were treated with catheter ablation. The absence of atrial fibrillation without the use of anti-arrhythmic drugs throughout the follow-up was observed in 70% of patients following thoracoscopic pulmonary vein ablation and 18% after catheter ablation (p < 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Thoracoscopic pulmonary vein ablation may be superior to catheter ablation for first-time invasive treatment of symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation with regard to obtaining sinus rhythm off anti-arrhythmic drugs 12 months postoperative.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01336075 . Registered April 15th, 2011.

Left Atrial Appendage Electrical Isolation for Treatment of Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

In this study, the authors sought to perform a meta-analysis of controlled studies assessing the relationship between left atrial appendage (LAA) electrical isolation (EI) and recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF).

BACKGROUND

LAA triggers could play an important role in AF and can be treated with complete EI of the LAA via surgical or percutaneous approaches.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis of all controlled studies published as of November 21, 2016, assessing the relationship between left atrial appendage electrical isolation (LAAEI) and recurrent AF. The primary endpoint was atrial tachycardia (AT) or AF recurrence after the post-procedure blanking period. The association between LAAEI and AT/AF was estimated using random-effects modeling. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the DerSimonian and Laird method.

RESULTS

We identified 7 studies including 1,037 patients; LAAEI was performed in 566 patients (55%). LAAEI was associated with a significantly lower rate of AT/AF recurrence in the primary analysis (OR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.90; p = 0.02). The association between LAAEI and recurrent AT/AF was strongest in a sensitivity analysis restricted to studies of percutaneous LAAEI (OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.46; p < 0.001; 5 studies, n = 623). LAAEI was not associated with thromboembolism (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.18 to 1.39; p = 0.18; 5 studies, n = 767), although these studies either incorporated LAA occlusion (3 studies, n = 552 patients) or follow-up echocardiography to assess LAA function (2 studies, n = 215 patients) to inform antithrombotic strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

LAAEI is associated with a significant reduction in recurrent AT/AF. Randomized trials are required to confirm the efficacy and long-term safety of LAAEI and to determine the optimal concomitant antithrombotic strategy.

The future of hybrid ablation: an emerging need for an anticoagulation protocol for thoracoscopic ablation

The midterm efficacy of hybrid ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) reported in recent papers is about 70% in terms of sinus rhythm maintenance without antiarrhythmic drugs. Bearing in mind that the majority of patients enrolled are patients with persistent and long-standing persistent AF, the reported efficacies seem to be very good. Despite the high efficacies, safety remains a critical issue in hybrid, and especially thoracoscopic ablations. The frequency of complications during thoracoscopic ablations is more than 10% in the majority of reports. Most are short-term with no sequelae (such as pneumothorax or pneumonia); however, life-threatening complications have also been described, e.g., a sternotomy in response to a laceration of the left atrium (LA). One of the most serious ablation complications is stroke. The rate of strokes, which has been reported during or shortly after thoracoscopic ablation, seems to be higher than the rate reported after catheter ablation. This is especially true in papers describing thoracoscopic ablations that were not immediately followed by a catheter ablation. A possible explanation is differences in anticoagulation management during the two procedures. During catheter endocardial procedures, a standard anticoagulation protocol exists and is routinely applied; however, there is no such set of recommendations for anticoagulation during the thoracoscopic-phase of an ablation. It seems probable that, in many cases, no anticoagulation is used during thoracoscopic ablations. Moreover, whatever anticoagulation protocol is used during thoracoscopic ablations often goes unreported. A discussion about the best anticoagulation strategy during thoracoscopic ablation is urgently needed. In the future, standards of anticoagulation during thoracoscopic ablation should be clearly reported, just as they are now for catheter ablations.

Minimally Invasive Epicardial Surgical Ablation Alone Versus Hybrid Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with non-paroxysmal AF is an elusive goal. Some suggest that hybrid ablation, combining minimally invasive epicardial surgical ablation with endocardial catheter ablation, may be more effective than either modality alone. However, randomised trials are lacking. We investigated whether hybrid ablation is more effective than epicardial ablation alone at preventing recurrent AF by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. The review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42016043389). MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for studies of standalone minimally invasive epicardial ablation of AF and/or hybrid ablation, identifying 41 non-overlapping studies comprising 2737 patients. A random-effects meta-analysis, meta-regression and sensitivity analysis were performed. Single-procedure survival free from atrial arrhythmias without antiarrhythmic drugs was similar between epicardial-alone and hybrid approaches at 12 months (epicardial alone 71.5 %; [95 % CI 66.1-76.9], hybrid 63.2 %; [95 % CI 51.5-75.0]) and 24 months (epicardial alone 68.5 %; [95 % CI 57.7-79.3], hybrid 57.0 %; [95 % CI 33.6-80.4]). Freedom from atrial arrhythmias with AADs and rates of unplanned additional catheter ablations were also similar between groups. Major complications occurred more often with hybrid ablation (epicardial alone 2.9 %; [95 % CI 1.9-3.9], hybrid 7.3 %; [95 % CI 4.2-10.5]). Meta-regression suggested that bipolar radiofrequency energy and thoracoscopic access were associated with greater efficacy, but adjusting for these factors did not unmask any difference between epicardial-alone and hybrid ablation. Hybrid and epicardial ablation alone appear to be equally effective treatments for AF, although hybrid ablation may be associated with higher complication rates. These data derived from observational studies should be verified with randomised data.