Pulmonary vein isolation for the treatment of atrial fibrillation in patients with impaired systolic function

Heart failure and atrial fibrillation: Is atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure pointless or mandatory?

A vast amount of now well-established clinical and epidemiological data indicates a close, interdependent, and symbiotic association between atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). Both AF and HF, when co-exist in a patient, have serious treatment and prognostic implications. Based on the prevailing knowledge of the topic, various societies have issued a number of guidelines regarding the management of patients with AF and HF. Overall, it is the rhythm control strategy that has shown beneficial effect over the rate control strategy with improvement in symptoms of AF and HF. While antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) and catheter ablation (CA) may be utilized as rhythm control strategy for AF, both AADs and CA have limitations of their own. Furthermore, with the progress made in various pharmacotherapeutic agents in HF, one could question the utility of CA in HF (i.e., whether ablation is mandatory or pointless in patients who have HF). The purpose of this review is to discuss this very point, focusing on the beneficial, neutral, or detrimental outcome of CA based on the category and class of HF.

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation: a Sub-Saharan African perspective

Cardiovascular diseases are a well-established cause of death in high-income countries. In the last 20 years, Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has seen one of the sharpest increases in cardiovascular disease-related mortality, superseding that of infectious diseases, including HIV/AIDS, in South Africa. This increase is evidenced by a growing burden of heart failure and atrial fibrillation (AF) risk factors. AF is a common comorbidity of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), which predisposes to an increased risk of stroke, rehospitalizations, and mortality compared with patients in sinus rhythm. AF had the largest relative increase in cardiovascular disease burden between 1990 and 2010 in SSA and the second highest (106.4%) increase in disability-adjusted life-years (DALY) between 1990 and 2017. Over the last decade, significant advancements in the management of both HFrEF and AF have emerged. However, managing HFrEF/AF remains a clinical challenge for physicians, compounded by the suboptimal efficacy of guideline-mandated pharmacotherapy in this group of patients. There may be an essential role for racial differences and genetic influence on therapeutic outcomes of HFrEF/AF patients, further complicating our overall understanding of the disease and its pathophysiology. In SSA, the lack of accurate and up-to-date epidemiological data on this subgroup of patients presents a challenge in our quest to prevent and reduce adverse outcomes. This narrative review provides a contemporary overview of the epidemiology of HFrEF/AF in SSA. We highlight important differences in the demographic and aetiological profile and the management of this subpopulation, emphasizing what is currently known and, more importantly, what is still unknown about HFrEF/AF in SSA.

Efficacy of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with significant functional mitral regurgitation

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation has been established to be an effective therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) and is recommended as the treatment of choice for many patients, including those with clinically significant functional mitral regurgitation (MR). However, there is little information available about the clinical efficacy of catheter ablation for paroxysmal AF in patients with significant functional MR.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 247 patients with paroxysmal AF who underwent AF ablation. The study included 28 (11.3%) patients with significant functional MR and 219 (88.7%) without significant functional MR. AF recurrence was defined as the occurrence of confirmed atrial tachyarrhythmia lasting >30 seconds beyond 3 months after catheter ablation.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 20.1 ± 7.4 months (range, 3-36 months), 45 (18.2%) patients developed recurrence of AF. The recurrence rate of AF was higher in patients with significant functional MR than in those without significant functional MR (42.9% vs 15.1%; P < .001). Univariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis showed that significant functional MR (hazard ratio [HR], 3.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.78-6.72; P < .001), age (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08; P = .009), the CHA2DS2-VASc score (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.05-1.56; P = .017), and heart failure (HR, 4.71; 95% CI, 1.85-11.96; P = .001) were associated with the risk of recurrence. Multivariable analysis showed that significant functional MR (HR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.21-5.05; P = .013), age (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00-1.07; P = .031), and heart failure (HR, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.27-9.03; P = .015) were independent predictors of AF recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Patients with significant functional MR have an increased risk of AF recurrence after catheter ablation.

Efficacy of Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Catheter ablation (CA) has emerged as an effective therapy for AF. We conducted a meta-analysis to update the current clinical evidence on the efficacy of CA for AF in patients with HCM. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Clinicaltrials.gov for interventional and observational studies assessing single and multiple procedure success rate of CA in HCM patients. Our meta-analysis included 25 studies involving 1817 patients. Success rate following single procedure was 40.4% (95% CI 33.1 to 48.0%) at latest follow-up. The pooled success rate following multiple procedures was 51.4% (95% CI 42.9% to 60.0%) at latest follow-up. In the subgroup analysis for AF subtype, TCA was more successful for paroxysmal AF compared to non-paroxysmal AF. For the subset of studies reporting drug-free success rate, single and multiple procedures had a success rate of 33.4% (95% CI 19.3 to 49.1%) and 51.8% (95% CI 41.3 to 62.2%) at latest follow-up, respectively. CA is a suitable option for AF in patients with HCM. Success rate is greater in paroxysmal AF, after multiple procedures and with antiarrhythmic drugs.

Catheter ablation for patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction: insights from the KiCS-AF multicentre cohort study

AIMS

The usefulness of catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) across a broad spectrum of heart failure (HF) patients remains to be established. We assessed the association of CA with both health-related quality of life (QoL) and cardiovascular events among HF patients with reduced and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in an 'all-comer' outpatient-based AF registry.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Of 3303 patients with AF consecutively enrolled in a retrospective multicentre registry that mandated the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-life (AFEQT) questionnaire at registration and 1-year follow-up, we extracted data from 530 patients complicating clinical HF. The association between CA and both 1-year change in AFEQT Overall Summary (AFEQT-OS) scores and 2-year composite clinical outcomes (including all-cause death, stroke, and HF hospitalization) was assessed by multivariable analyses. The median duration of AF was 108 days (52-218 days), and 83.4% had LVEF >35%. Overall, 75 patients (14.2%) underwent CA for AF within 1-year after registration. At 1-year follow-up, 67.2% in the ablation group showed clinically meaningful improvements of ≥ 5 points in AFEQT-OS score than 47.8% in the non-ablation group {adjusted odds ratio, 2.03 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-3.64], P = 0.017}. Furthermore, the composite endpoint of all-cause death, stroke, and HF hospitalization occurred less frequently in the ablation group than the non-ablation group [adjusted hazard ratio, 0.27 (95% CI: 0.09-0.86), P = 0.027].

CONCLUSION

Among AF-HF patients, CA was associated with improved QoL and lower risk of cardiovascular events against drug therapy alone, even for patients with mildly reduced and preserved LVEF.

Atrial fibrillation ablation as first-line therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF): evaluating the impact on patient survival

INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure share several pathophysiological mechanisms. As a result of their association, patients have worse outcomes than if either condition were present alone.

AREAS COVERED

While multiple trials report no significant difference between the use of pharmacological rhythm control and the use of rate control in terms of mortality and morbidity in patients with HFrEF, there is evidence to suggest that catheter ablation is beneficial in this patient population. The present review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of catheter ablation as a treatment modality for atrial fibrillation in patients with HFrEF as well as evaluate its outcome on survival.

EXPERT OPINION

An appropriate patient selection strategy for patients with HFrEF could be the next step in determining which patients might benefit most from catheter ablation. Future atrial fibrillation management may incorporate digital health and pulsed-field ablation.

Management of atrial fibrillation: two decades of progress - a scientific statement from the European Cardiac Arrhythmia Society

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. The aim of this review was to evaluate the progress made in the management of AF over the two last decades.

RESULTS

Clinical classification of AF is usually based on the presence of symptoms, the duration of AF episodes and their possible recurrence over time, although incidental diagnosis is not uncommon. The majority of patients with AF have associated cardiovascular diseases and more recently the recognition of modifiable risk factors both cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular which should be considered in its management. Among AF-related complications, stroke and transient ischaemic accidents (TIAs) carry considerable morbidity and mortality risk. The use of implantable devices such as pacemakers and defibrillators, wearable garments and subcutaneous cardiac monitors with recording capabilities has enabled to access the burden of "subclinical AF". The recent introduction of non-vitamin K antagonists has led to improve the prevention of stroke and peripheral embolism. Agents capable of reversing non-vitamin K antagonists have also become available in case of clinically relevant major bleeding. Transcatheter closure of left atrial appendage represents an option for patients unable to take oral anticoagulation. When treating patients with AF, clinicians need to select the most suitable strategy, i.e. control of heart rate and/or restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm. The studies comparing these two strategies have not shown differences in terms of mortality. If an AF episode is poorly tolerated from a haemodynamic standpoint, electrical cardioversion is indicated. Otherwise, restoration of sinus rhythm can be obtained using intravenous pharmacological cardioversion and oral class I or class III antiarrhythmic is used to prevent recurrences. During the last two decades after its introduction in daily practice, catheter ablation has gained considerable escalation in popularity. Progress has also been made in AF associated with heart failure with reduced or preserved ejection fraction.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant progress has been made within the past 2 decades both in the pharmacological and non-pharmacological managements of this cardiac arrhythmia.

Catheter Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation in Class IV Systolic Heart Failure: A Single-Center Case Series

Questions remain as to how aggressively catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation may be applied to patients with advanced systolic congestive heart failure, owing to a historic under-representation in multicenter clinical ablation trials. We sought to describe the experience of catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation in Class IV systolic heart failure patients at our institution. All Class IV systolic heart failure patients (left ventricular assist device patients excluded) between 2017 and 2020 referred for radiofrequency ablation were included. Out of 10 patients, 7 agreed to proceed, had restoration of normal sinus rhythm upon completion of the catheter ablation procedure, and of which five (71%) remain in normal rhythm at a mean follow-up of 23 months. Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with Class IV chronic systolic heart failure, even on advanced heart failure therapies, is feasible, and can improve heart failure status with maintenance of NSR.

Review of the 2020 ESC Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation-What Has Changed and How Does This Affect Daily Practice

The high prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in the overall population and its association with substantial morbidity, increased mortality and health care cost has instigated significant basic and clinical research efforts over recent years. The publication of multiple new high-quality randomized multi-center trials in the area of AF management and the rapidly evolving technological progress in terms of diagnostic possibilities and catheter ablation in recent years demanded a revision of the previous ESC AF Guidelines from 2016. The 2020 guidelines provide up-to-date, evidence-based guidance for the management of AF. One of the most important innovations is the presentation of a new concept for structural characterization of AF (the “4S AF scheme”) replacing the traditional classification based on its temporal pattern alone (paroxysmal-persistent-permanent). The 4S-AF-scheme highlights the importance of systematic assessment of stroke risk, severity of symptoms, total AF burden and underlying substrate as the foundation for effective and individualized AF treatment for each and every patient. Further novelties relate to the presentation of an easy and intuitive management pathway (“ABC pathway”) and strengthening the recommendations for early rhythm control, in particular the role of first line catheter ablation in heart failure. Another core component of the guidelines is the focus on patient involvement to achieve optimal outcomes. Patient education, shared decision making and incorporation of patient values and patient reported outcome of treatment interventions as well as integrated care by a multidisciplinary team all have a central role in the proposed management pathway for AF.

Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure: What do we know? What can we do?

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are two conditions that frequently impact reciprocally on each other. Patients with HFrEF have an increased risk of stroke, hospitalization and mortality after they develop AF and vice versa, AF causing deterioration of the ejection fraction is also associated to increased mortality. Catheter ablation has emerged as an effective alternative to antiarrhythmic drug treatment to maintain sinus rhythm and some randomized trials have shown a potential benefit in terms of mortality and hospitalization. This review discusses the available evidence regarding catheter ablation treatment in this specific patient group.

Impact of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Catheter ablation has been shown to improve left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). Our aim was to assess the impact of AF ablation on the outcome of patients with HF and LV systolic dysfunction.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective observational cohort study of all patients with HF and LVEF <50% and with no apparent cause for systolic dysfunction other than AF who underwent catheter ablation in a tertiary referral center between July 2016 and November 2018. The primary endpoint was a ≥5% improvement in LVEF. Secondary endpoints included improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and reduction in LV end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) and left atrial diameter (LAD).

RESULTS

Of 153 patients who underwent AF ablation in this period, 22 (77% male, median age 61 [IQR 54-64] years) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 11.1 months (IQR 6.1-19.0). After ablation, median LVEF increased from 40% (IQR 33-41) to 58% (IQR 55-62) (p<0.01), mean NYHA class improved from 2.35±0.49 to 1.3±0.47 (p<0.001), and median LAD and LVEDD decreased from 48.0 (IQR 43.5-51.5) mm to 44 (IQR 40-49) mm (p<0.01) and from 61.0 (IQR 54.0-64.8) mm to 55.0 (52.2-58.0) mm (p<0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In patients with HF and LV systolic dysfunction, AF ablation is associated not only with improved functional status but also with favorable structural remodeling, including improvement in LVEF and decreases in LAD and LVEDD.

Atrial fibrillation in patients with systolic heart failure: pathophysiology mechanisms and management

Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) demonstrate a constantly increasing prevalence during the 21^st century worldwide, as a result of the aging population and the successful interventions of the clinical practice in the deterioration of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. HF and AF share common risk factors and pathophysiological mechanisms, creating the base of a constant interrelation. AF impairs systolic and diastolic function, resulting in the increasing incidence of HF, whereas the structural and neurohormonal changes in HF with preserved or reduced ejection fraction increase the possibility of the AF development. The temporal relationship of the development of either condition affects the diagnostic algorithms, the prognosis and the ideal therapeutic strategy that leads to euvolaemia, management of non-cardiovascular comorbidities, control of heart rate or restoration of sinus rate, ventricular synchronization, prevention of sudden death, stroke, embolism, or major bleeding and maintenance of a sustainable quality of life. The indicated treatment for the concomitant HF and AF includes rate or/and rhythm control as well as thromboembolism prophylaxis, while the progress in the understanding of their pathophysiological interdependence and the introduction of the genetic profiling, create new paths in the diagnosis, the prognosis and the prevention of these diseases.

Hemodynamic Management of Patients with Ejection Fraction < 50% Undergoing Pulmonary Vein Ablation

There is no consensus regarding optimal methodology forblood pressure monitoring inpatients with a depressed ejection fraction undergoingcatheter ablationfor atrial fibrillation. Our goalswere to determine ifhemodynamicmanagementdifferences exist during radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with and without an ejection fraction< 50%, and whether management was influenced by the utilization of invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring. This single-center trial retrospectively compared blood pressure management during catheterablation of atrial fibrillationin all patients with an ejection fraction< 50% over a 2-year span (n=44), and compared to an age-matched cohort with preserved ejection fraction ablated over the same span in time (n=44). Blood pressure was not significantly managed differently between the groups, and did not appear to be influenced by the use of invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring.Hemodynamic management is similar across the spectrum of ejection fraction, regardless of invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring, which challenges the need for invasive arterial blood pressure monitoringduringcatheter ablation ofatrial fibrillationin left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

Arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy: A potentially reversible cause of refractory cardiogenic shock requiring venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

BACKGROUND

The most severe form of arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy in adults- refractory cardiogenic shock requiring mechanical circulatory support-has rarely been reported.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe the management of critically ill patients admitted for acute, nonischemic, or worsening of previously known cardiac dysfunction and recent-onset supraventricular arrhythmia who developed refractory cardiogenic shock requiring venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO).

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.

RESULTS

Between 2004 and 2018, 35 patients received VA-ECMO for acute, nonischemic cardiogenic shock and recent supraventricular arrhythmia (77% atrial fibrillation [AF]). Cardiogenic shock was the first disease manifestation in 21 patients (60%). Characteristics at ECMO implantation [median (interquartile range)] were Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score 10 (7-13); inotrope score 29 (11-80); left ventricular ejection (LVEF) fraction 10% (10%-15%); and lactate level 8 (4-11) mmol/L. For 12 patients, amiodarone and/or electric cardioversion successfully reduced arrhythmia, improved LVEF, and enabled weaning off VA-ECMO; 11 had long-term survival without transplantation or long-term assist device. Eight patients experiencing arrhythmia-reduction failure underwent ablation procedures (7 atrioventricular node [AVN] with pacing, 1 atrial tachycardia) and were weaned off VA-ECMO; 7 survived. Of the remaining 15 patients without arrhythmia reduction or ablation, only the 6 bridged to heart transplantation or left ventricular (LV) assist device survived.

CONCLUSION

Arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy, mainly AF-related, is an underrecognized cause of refractory cardiogenic shock and should be considered in patients with nonischemic cardiogenic shock and recent-onset supraventricular arrhythmia. VA-ECMO support allowed safe arrhythmia reduction or rate control by AVN ablation while awaiting recovery, even among those with severe LV dilation.

Reduction of mortality by catheter ablation in real-world atrial fibrillation patients with heart failure

Whether catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) improves survival and affects other outcomes in real-world heart failure (HF) patients is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate whether ablation reduces death, and other outcomes in real-world AF patients with HF. Among 834,735 patients with AF from 2006 to 2015 in the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, 3173 HF patients underwent AF ablation. Propensity score weighting was used to correct for differences between the groups. During median 54 months follow-up, the risk of all-cause death in ablated patients was less than half of that in patients with medical therapy (2.8 vs. 6.2 per 100 person-years; hazard ratio [HR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27–0.65, p < 0.001). Ablation was related with lower risk of cardiovascular death (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.32–0.62, p < 0.001), HF admission (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.33–0.46, p < 0.001) and stroke/systemic embolism (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37–0.53, p < 0.001). In subgroup analysis, the risk of all-cause death was reduced in most subgroups except in the elderly (≥ 75 years) and strictly anticoagulated patients. Ablation may be associated with reduced risk of all-cause death and cardiovascular death in real-world AF patients with HF, supporting the role of AF ablation in patients with HF.

Atrial conduction time associated predictors of recurrent atrial fibrillation

Identifying patients at high risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence remains challenging. This study aimed to evaluate total atrial conduction time (TACT) and left atrial (LA) asynchrony as predictors of AF recurrence. Consecutive patients after the first AF episode, terminated either spontaneously or with cardioversion, underwent transthoracic echocardiography. TACT, estimated by the time delay between the onset of P-wave and the peak A'-wave on the Tissue Doppler Imaging (PA-TDI duration), atrial volumetric and functional parameters, and biatrial strain were assessed. We calculated mean PA-TDI-the average of PA-TDI measurements in all left atrial (LA) walls-and the difference between the longest and the shortest PA interval (DLS) and the standard deviation of 4 PA intervals (SD4) to assess the LA global remodeling and asynchrony, respectively. The primary endpoint was AF recurrence. Patients with recurrent AF had significantly prolonged PA-TDI intervals in each LA wall-and thus mean PA-TDI-than those without recurrence (mean PA-TDI: 157.4 ± 17.9 vs. 110.2 ± 7.7 ms, p < 0.001). At univariate analysis, LA maximum volume index, total LA emptying fraction, right atrial maximum volume index, PA-TDI, DLS, and SD4 were predictors of AF recurrence. At multivariable analysis, PA-TDI intervals in all LA walls remained strong predictors with mean PA-TDI (odds ratio 1.04; 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.06) having an optimal cutoff of 125.8 ms in receiver operator characteristics curve analysis providing 98% sensitivity and 100% specificity for AF recurrence (area under the curve = 0.989). PA-TDI was an independent predictor of AF recurrence and outperformed established echocardiographic parameters.

Impact of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation on cardiac disorders in patients with coexisting heart failure

Aims

We sought to investigate the time course of cardiac disorders after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with coexisting heart failure (HF) during long‐term follow‐up.

Methods and results

We analysed consecutive 280 patients undergoing first‐time catheter ablation for AF who had coexisting HF, which was defined as prior HF hospitalization, estimated right ventricular systolic pressure ≥45 mmHg, or B‐type natriuretic peptide (BNP) ≥200 pg/dL before the procedure. The primary endpoints were improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), E/e′, BNP, left atrial dimension (LAD), and mitral regurgitation (MR) at 1 year. The secondary endpoints were serial changes of LVEF, E/e′, BNP, LAD, and MR at 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years and cumulative incidence of HF hospitalization. During the mean follow‐up of 5.1 ± 3.0 years, 70.7% of patients were free from recurrent AF. Among patients with LVEF < 50%, E/e′ ≥ 15, BNP ≥ 200 pg/dL, LAD ≥ 40 mm, and moderate‐to‐severe MR, changes in those parameters from baseline to 1 year were 34.5 ± 9.9% to 43.2 ± 14.4% (P < 0.001), 19.7 ± 3.9 to 12.5 ± 6.6 (P < 0.001), 290 to 85 pg/dL (P < 0.001), and 100% to 37.8% (P < 0.001), respectively. The improvements in the cardiac disorders were maintained up to 5 years except for E/e′. In patients with LVEF < 40%, significant delayed improvement of LVEF beyond 1 year was observed (ΔLVEF = 10.5 ± 18.5, P = 0.001), but not in patients with LVEF of 40–49%. The cumulative incidence of HF hospitalization was 12.6% at 5 years. Baseline diastolic dysfunction was the only independent predictor for subsequent HF hospitalization.

Conclusions

In patients undergoing AF ablation with coexisting HF, all cardiac disorders significantly improved after the procedure, which was mostly maintained during 5 year follow‐up.

Role of sST2 in predicting recurrence of atrial fibrillation after radiofrequency catheter ablation

INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrosis is associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after ablation. This study aims to determine the relationship between soluble ST2 (sST2), a profibrotic biomarker, and AF recurrence after radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA).

METHODS

AF patients referred for RFCA were consecutively included from October 2017 to May 2019. Baseline characteristics were collected, and sST2 levels were determined before ablation. Left atrial substrate mapping was performed after circumferential pulmonary vein isolation under sinus rhythm, and substrate was modified in low-voltage zones. A second procedure was recommended under recurrence.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-eight patients (146 males, average age 61.0 ± 8.8) were included. After a medium follow-up of 13.5 months, 52 patients (20.2%) had recurrence and received a second procedure. Preoperative sST2 level in patients with recurrence was significantly higher than that in patients without (31.3 ng/mL vs 20.3 ng/mL, P < .001). In those undergoing second ablation, sST2 level in patients with new abnormalities during endocardial mapping was significantly higher than that in patients without (43.0 ng/mL vs 22.1 ng/mL, P < .001). An sST2 level over 26.9 ng/mL could predict AF recurrence with new abnormalities during endocardial mapping with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 75.9%. Multiple logistic analysis showed that sST2 level was an independent predictor of AF recurrence with new abnormalities during endocardial mapping (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

sST2 level was associated with new abnormalities during endocardial mapping and recurrence of AF after ablation. It might have significance in choosing treatment strategies for AF.

Rhythm control for patients with atrial fibrillation complicated with heart failure in the contemporary era of catheter ablation: a stratified pooled analysis of randomized data

AIMS

The optimal treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) has been a subject of debate for years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rhythm control strategy in patients with AF complicated with HF regarding hard clinical endpoints.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Up-to-date randomized data comparing rhythm control using antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) vs. rate control (Subset A) or rhythm control using catheter ablation vs. medical therapy (Subset B) in AF and HF patients were pooled. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, re-hospitalization, stroke, and thromboembolic events. A total of 11 studies involving 3598 patients were enrolled (Subset A: 2486; Subset B: 1112). As compared with medical rate control, the AADs rhythm control was associated with similar all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR): 0.96, P = 0.65], significantly higher rate of re-hospitalization (OR: 1.25, P = 0.01), and similar rate of stroke and thromboembolic events (OR: 0.91, P = 0.76,); however, as compared with medical therapy, catheter ablation rhythm control was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (OR: 0.51, P = 0.0003), reduced re-hospitalization rate (OR: 0.44, P = 0.003), similar rate of stroke events (OR: 0.59, P = 0.27), greater improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction [weighted mean difference (WMD): 6.8%, P = 0.0004], lower arrhythmia recurrence (29.6% vs. 80.1%, OR: 0.04, P < 0.00001), and greater improvement in quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score) (WMD: -9.1, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Catheter ablation as rhythm control strategy substantially improves survival rate, reduces re-hospitalization, increases the maintenance rate of sinus rhythm, contributes to preserve cardiac function, and improves quality of life for AF patients complicated with HF.

A multicenter study comparing the outcome of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation between cryoballoon and radiofrequency ablation in patients with heart failure (CRABL‐HF): Study design

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

SANS FLUORO Optimized: A Case Report of Pulmonary Vein Isolation in a Patient with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Defibrillator and the Optimizer™ III Device

We offer the first reported case of a pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) procedure performed in a patient with two devices, specifically a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) and an Optimizer™ III device (Impulse Dynamics, Mount Laurel, NJ, USA), using the SANS FLUORO technique with zero fluoroscopy. In total, this patient had six leads traversing the right atrium, including two right atrial leads, three right ventricular leads—two associated with the Optimizer™ system and one implantable cardiac defibrillator lead—and a left ventricular lead.

Catheter Ablation Improves Mortality and Other Outcomes in Real-World Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Background

It is still controversial whether catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) improves survival and other outcomes in patients with AF. This study evaluated whether ablation reduces death and other events in nationwide real‐world Asian patients with AF.

Methods and Results

From the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, 194 928 adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with newly diagnosed AF were treated with ablation or medical therapy (antiarrhythmic or rate control drugs) between January 1, 2005, and December 1, 2015. Among these patients, this study included 9185 with ablation and 18 770 with medical therapy. The time at risk was counted from the first medical therapy, and ablation was analyzed as a time‐varying covariate. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to correct for differences between the groups. After weighting, the 2 cohorts had similar background characteristics. During a median (25th, 75th percentiles) follow‐up of 43 (19, 81) months, ablation of AF was associated with lower incidence and risk of composite outcome, including death, heart failure admission, and stroke/systemic embolism (2.5 and 6.4 per 100 person‐years, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.43–0.52; P<0.001), all‐cause death (1.0 and 3.6 per 100 person‐years; HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.36–0.47; P<0.001), heart failure admission (0.7 and 1.9 per 100 person‐years; HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.37–0.50), and ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (1.1 and 2.8 per 100 person‐years; HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.34–0.44) than medical therapy.

Conclusions

Ablation may be associated with lower risk of death, heart failure admission, and ischemic stroke/systemic embolism in real‐world Asian patients with AF.

Arrhythmia-Induced Cardiomyopathy: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

Arrhythmias coexist in patients with heart failure (HF) and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. Tachycardias, atrial fibrillation, and premature ventricular contractions are known to trigger a reversible dilated cardiomyopathy referred as arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy (AiCM). It remains unclear why some patients are more prone to develop AiCM despite similar arrhythmia burdens. The challenge is to determine whether arrhythmias are fully, partially, or at all responsible for an observed LV dysfunction. AiCM should be suspected in patients with mean heart rate >100 beats/min, atrial fibrillation, and/or premature ventricular contractions burden ≥10%. Reversal of cardiomyopathy by elimination of the arrhythmia confirms AiCM. Therapeutic choice depends on the culprit arrhythmia, patient comorbidities, and preferences. Following recovery of LV function, patients require continued follow-up if an abnormal myocardial substrate is present. Appropriate diagnosis and treatment of AiCM is likely to improve quality of life and clinical outcomes and to reduce hospital admission and health care spending.

Effectiveness of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation according to heart failure etiology

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation is an important rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with concomitant heart failure (HF). The objective of this study was to assess the comparative efficacy of AF ablation patients with ischemic vs nonischemic heart failure.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of patients with HF who underwent AF ablation. Outcomes were compared based on HF etiology and included in-hospital events, symptoms (Mayo AF Symptom Inventory [MAFSI]), and functional status (New York Heart Association class) and freedom from atrial arrhythmias at 12 months.

RESULTS

Among 242 patients (n = 70 [29%] ischemic, n = 172 [71%] nonischemic), patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy were younger (mean age 64 ± 11.5 vs 69 ± 9.1, P = .002), more often female (36% vs 17%, P = .004), and had higher mean left-ventricular ejection fraction (47% vs 42%, P = .0007). There were no significant differences in periprocedural characteristics, including mean procedure time (243 ± 74.2 vs 259 ± 81.8 minutes, P = .1) and nonleft atrial ablation (17% vs 20%, P = .6). All-cause adverse events were similar in each group (15% vs 17%, P = .7). NYHA and MAFSI scores improved significantly at follow-up and did not differ according to HF etiology (P = .5; P = .10-1.00 after Bonferroni correction). There were no significant differences in freedom from recurrent atrial arrhythmia at 12-months between ischemic (74%) and nonischemic patients (78%): adjusted RR 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.33-1.19.

CONCLUSIONS

Catheter ablation in patients with AF and concomitant heart failure leads to significant improvements in functional and symptom status without significant differences between patients with ischemic vs nonischemic HF etiology.

Uremic Toxins and Atrial Fibrillation: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent arrhythmia in the general population. There is a close association between chronic kidney disease (CKD) and AF. In recent years, attention has been focused on the relationship between AF and uremic toxins, including indoxyl sulfate (IS). Several animal studies have shown that IS promotes the development and progression of AF. IS has been shown to cause fibrosis and inflammation in the myocardium and exacerbate AF by causing oxidative stress and reducing antioxidative defense. Administration of AST-120, an absorbent of uremic toxins, decreases uremic toxin-induced AF in rodents. We have recently reported that patients with a higher serum IS level exhibit a higher rate of AF recurrence after catheter ablation, with serum IS being a significant predictor of AF recurrence. In this review, we discuss the possible mechanisms behind the AF-promoting effects of uremic toxins and summarize the reported clinical studies of uremic toxin-induced AF.

Cryoballoon Ablation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: An Evaluation of Cohorts With and Without Structural Heart Disease

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the most widely adopted strategy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) ablation. Limited evidence on acute results and late outcomes of cryoballoon (CB)-PVI in patients with structural heart disease (SHD) exist. The aim of this analysis was to compare acute procedural results and the 1-year recurrence rate of a single CB-PVI procedure in a PAF population with and without SHD.

METHOD

From April 2012 to May 2017, a total of 2,031 patients with AF underwent CB-PVI and were followed prospectively in the framework of the One Shot TO Pulmonary vein isolation (1STOP) ClinicalService project, involving 36 Italian cardiology centres. We identified patients with SHD according to criteria proposed by current ESC guidelines: left ventricular (LV) systolic or diastolic dysfunction, long-standing hypertension with LV hypertrophy, and/or other structural heart disease. Data on procedural outcomes and long-term freedom from AF recurrence were evaluated.

RESULTS

Our population consisted of 1,452 patients, of whom 282 (19.4%) were classified as having SHD. Compared to non-SHD patients, the SHD cohort was older (mean ± standard deviation, 62.9 ± 9.0 vs 58.2 ± 11.4 years; p < 0.001), was more frequently male (79.1% vs 69.8%; p < 0.002), had a higher thrombo-embolic risk (CHA₂DS₂VASc ≥2: 63.4% vs 40.2%; p < 0.001), had a higher body mass index (27.7 ± 3.9 vs 26.4 ± 3.9 kg/m²; p < 0.001), had a larger atrial diameter (43.8 ± 7.0 vs 40.2 ± 5.8 mm; p < 0.001), and had a lower LV ejection fraction (57.2 ± 7.7% vs 60.7 ± 6.0%; p < 0.001). At the time of ablation, 73% of patients were on class Ic or III anti-arrhythmic drugs. Procedure time (106.9 ± 41.5 vs 112.1 ± 46.8 min; p = 0.248), fluoroscopic time (28.7 ± 14.7 vs 28.6 ± 15.2 min; p = 0.819), and complication rate (3.9% vs 4.8%; p = 0.525) were not different between the SHD and non-SHD cohorts. However, the acute success rate (98.9% vs 97.7%; p = 0.016) was higher in patients with SHD. After a follow-up of 13.4 ± 12.8 months, freedom from symptomatic recurrence was 78.0% for SHD and 78.4% for non-SHD (p = 0.895). Recurrence rate was not related to either left atrial size or LVEF. In the SHD cohort, Class Ic or III anti-arrhythmic drugs treatment decreased from 70.7% of patients before ablation to 28.7% of patients after CB-PVI (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CB-PVI was extensively applied to treat patients with PAF. Unlike previous PVI experiences, the acute success and recurrence rate after a single procedure was not related to the presence of SHD or to the degree of cardiac remodelling. Further studies are required to define whether CB-PVI has a useful role in patients with a significantly reduced ejection fraction as those patients were under-represented in the current population.

Catheter ablation in atrial fibrillation: is there a mortality benefit in patients with diabetes and heart failure?

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commonly sustained arrhythmia, and patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) exhibit an increased incidence of AF. Besides DM, heart failure (HF) shares pathophysiological links with AF, mainly related to the pathological remodeling of hearts affected by structural disease. As in a vicious circle, AF may contribute to HF worsening and increased mortality in patients with structural heart diseases, and the outcome may be further impaired when concomitant DM is present. Although no data directly referring to DM patients with HF are available, indirect information can be drawn from large studies on patients with HF and AF. The present review discusses the outcome of AF ablation in patients with DM and HF, focusing on safety, efficacy, and most particularly on hard endpoints such as mortality and thromboembolic event incidence.

Efficacy of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with congenital heart disease

Aims

Advances in surgical techniques allow an increasing number of children with congenital heart disease (CHD) to reach adulthood. As patients grow older, atrial fibrillation (AF) is evolving into a major clinical concern and can be difficult to manage medically. Primary AF catheter ablation may, therefore, have a role in this setting but few reports have evaluated its efficacy in CHD patients.

Methods and results

We retrospectively reviewed 58 consecutive patients [median age 51, interquartile range (IQR) 44–63 years, 57% male] with AF (45% paroxysmal) who underwent 122 ablation procedures in our tertiary centre in the last decade. The majority had CHD of moderate or severe complexity (57%, Bethesda Class 2 or 3) with a dilated left atrium (LA) (81%) and/or right atrium (86%). At 1-year from the first ablation, 32.8% of patients remained in sinus rhythm. Multiple procedures were required in 35 (60%) patients. Freedom from AF at 1-year after the 2nd and 3rd ablation was 40.9% and 36.5%, respectively. Multivariable predictors of AF recurrence were underlying anatomic complexity [hazard ratio (HR) in Bethesda 3 1.98, P = 0.006], type of AF (HR for persistent 1.87, P = 0.004), and indexed LA dimensions (HR for cm2/m2 1.06, P = 0.03).

Conclusion

While ablation may be a valid option for the treatment of AF in CHD patients, multiple procedures are likely to be required. Early referral and careful patient selection are essential to optimize the results of AF ablation, achieving a low rate of recurrence. Further studies are needed to validate our prognostic model and guide clinical practice.

Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure-Diagnostic, Therapeutic, and Prognostic Relevance

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) commonly coexist and are associated with an increased risk of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality. Both conditions develop into epidemics due to the ageing of the population and lead to poorer prognosis for the individual patients. Therapeutic strategies include treatment with oral anticoagulation, and rate and rhythm control concepts to prevent stroke and improve the cardiovascular outcome.

RECENT FINDINGS

Especially in HF patients, data suggest that catheter ablation of AF is superior to medical treatment. In patients with both AF and HF undergoing catheter ablation, significant increases in left ventricular ejection fraction and quality of life and decreases in related symptoms and major adverse cardiac events are reported. In addition, catheter ablation has been shown to reduce mortality and HF hospitalization in the medium term. For patients with AF and HF, an effective individualized therapeutic strategy to minimize potential complications and improve clinical outcomes is needed. Catheter ablation of AF seems to provide advantages in HF patients with AF. However, results of further long-term studies are awaited.

Should His Bundle Pacing Be Preferred over Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Following Atrioventricular Junction Ablation?

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) are associated with high morbidity and mortality, which is particularly detrimental when patients develop rapid ventricular rates (RVR). Atrioventricular junction (AVJ) ablation with pacemaker implantation has been used as a method of achieving rate control in patients with incessant AF with RVR. Right ventricular only pacing is known to be harmful in the setting of HF. His bundle pacing (HBP) and biventricular (BiV) pacing both offer durable pacing solutions that offer more physiologic activation. This review describes the benefits and drawbacks of HBP and BiV pacing in HF patients after AVJ ablation.

Prediction and Management of Recurrences after Catheter Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure

Catheter ablation is recommended in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) refractory to pharmacologic therapy. AF recurrence is common postablation, particularly in patients with heart failure, because of multiple structural and functional changes that can occur. Determining predictors of AF recurrence has become increasingly important. These include increased left atrial volume, termination of AF during the index ablation, electrocardiogram parameters, and serum biomarkers. Cardiac MRI can also determine the degree of scarring and left atrial sphericity, which is used in risk prediction scores. In patients with recurrence, further treatment options include pharmacologic therapy and atrioventricular nodal ablation with pacing.

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Previous randomized controlled trials (RCT)s showed similar outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) treated with anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD) compared to rate control therapy. We sought to evaluate whether catheter ablation is superior to medical therapy in patients with AF and HFrEF.

Methods

We searched electronic databases for all RCTs that compared catheter ablation and medical therapy (with or without use of AAD). We used random-effects models to summarize the studies. The primary end-point was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included heart failure-related hospitalizations and change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

Results

We retrieved and summarized 7 randomized controlled trials, enrolling 856 patients (429 in the catheter ablation arm and 427 in the medical therapy arm). Compared with medical therapy (including use of AAD), AF catheter ablation was associated with a significant reduction in mortality (risk ratio 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34 to 0.74; P = 0.0005) and heart failure-related hospitalizations (risk ratio 0.56; 95% CI: 0.44 to 0.71; P < 0.0001). Furthermore, catheter ablation led to significant improvements in LVEF (weighted mean difference, 7.48; 95% CI: 3.71 to 11.26; P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Compared to medical therapy, including use of AAD, catheter ablation for AF was associated with a significant reduction in mortality and heart failure-related hospitalizations as well as an improvement in LVEF in patients with HFrEF. Larger trials are needed to confirm whether rhythm control with ablation is superior to rate control in patients with AF and heart failure.

Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) both have become major cardiovascular epidemics, adversely affecting quality of life, decreasing longevity, and imparting a large economic burden on the healthcare system. Both share similar risk factors and frequently coexist, leading to increased morbidity and mortality relative to patients with either condition alone. Although evidence-based treatment guidelines for both diseases exist, consensus treatment strategies are less clear when AF and HF co-occur. Given the risks of antiarrhythmic drugs and their incomplete success in maintaining sinus rhythm, catheter ablation has become an increasingly popular alternative to pharmacologic rhythm control in symptomatic patients with AF with normal cardiac function. Although multiple studies have demonstrated the efficacy of catheter ablation in AF, studies examining the use of catheter ablation specifically in patients with HF have recently begun to emerge and provide some guidance in this group of patients. In this review, we examine the effects of catheter ablation of AF in patients with HF on maintenance of sinus rhythm, left ventricular ejection fraction, exercise capacity, quality of life, hospitalization, and mortality rates. Data regarding both HF with reduced ejection fraction and preserved ejection fraction are discussed.

Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Systolic Heart Failure Patients: Stone by Stone, a CASTLE

Heart failure (HF) and AF frequently coexist and are involved in a vicious cycle of adverse pathophysiologic interactions. Applying treatment algorithms that have been validated in the general AF population to patients with AF and HF may be fraught with risks and lack effectiveness. While firm recommendations on using catheter ablation for AF do exist, the subset of patients also suffering from HF needs to be further evaluated. Observational data indicate that a significant number of ablation procedures are performed in patients with coexistent HF. Initial randomised data on outcomes are encouraging. Apart from sinus rhythm maintenance, benefits have been observed in terms of other significant endpoints, including left ventricular ejection fraction, quality of life, exercise capacity and hospital readmissions for HF. Limited existing data on survival are also promising. In the present article, observational and randomised studies along with current practice guidelines are summarised.

Left Atrial Reverse Remodeling After Catheter Ablation of Nonparoxysmal Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

The efficacy of catheter ablation (CA) of nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction is controversial. We investigated the outcomes of CA for non-PAF in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and the impact of early left atrial (LA) reverse remodeling on these outcomes. A total of 251 consecutive patients who underwent CA for non-PAF were divided into 2 groups (reduced: preoperative LVEF ≤55%, LVEF: 46.5 ± 8.7%, n = 63; normal: >55%, 65.8 ± 5.8%, n = 188). We analyzed the 4-year atrial fibrillation- or atrial tachycardia (AT)-free survival rate and assessed changes in LVEF, hemodynamics, and LA reverse remodeling at the end of a 90-day blanking period. We also evaluated LA reverse remodeling in patients with and without recurrence. The atrial fibrillation- or AT-free survival rates were similar (reduced vs normal 48% vs 42%, p = 0.32). The reduced group exhibited significant LVEF improvement (before vs after, 46.5 ± 8.7% vs 58.4 ± 11.5%, p<0.001), reduced mitral regurgitation, and spectral tissue Doppler-derived index, and had greater percent maximum left atrial volume reduction (reduced vs normal 25.3 ± 18.2% vs 19.3 ± 16.2%, p = 0.014). Percent maximum left atrial volume reduction was greater in patients without recurrence (with recurrence vs without recurrence 17.3 ± 16.7% vs 25.4 ± 16.1%, p<0.001). In conclusion, the efficacy of non-PAF CA in patients with reduced LVEF was comparable with that in patients with normal LVEF. Greater LA reverse remodeling in these patients suggests an association with a reduced recurrence rate.

Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation with Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Mortality and morbidity are higher among patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure than among those with heart failure alone. Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation has been proposed as a means of improving outcomes among patients with heart failure who are otherwise receiving appropriate treatment.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation who did not have a response to antiarrhythmic drugs, had unacceptable side effects, or were unwilling to take these drugs to undergo either catheter ablation (179 patients) or medical therapy (rate or rhythm control) (184 patients) for atrial fibrillation in addition to guidelines-based therapy for heart failure. All the patients had New York Heart Association class II, III, or IV heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less, and an implanted defibrillator. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for worsening heart failure.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 37.8 months, the primary composite end point occurred in significantly fewer patients in the ablation group than in the medical-therapy group (51 patients [28.5%] vs. 82 patients [44.6%]; hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 0.87; P=0.007). Significantly fewer patients in the ablation group died from any cause (24 [13.4%] vs. 46 [25.0%]; hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.86; P=0.01), were hospitalized for worsening heart failure (37 [20.7%] vs. 66 [35.9%]; hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.83; P=0.004), or died from cardiovascular causes (20 [11.2%] vs. 41 [22.3%]; hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.84; P=0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure was associated with a significantly lower rate of a composite end point of death from any cause or hospitalization for worsening heart failure than was medical therapy. (Funded by Biotronik; CASTLE-AF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00643188 .).

Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

AF and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) frequently coexist. Catheter ablation is an increasingly utilised treatment strategy for patients with AF and can be safely performed and is effective in achieving sinus rhythm for patients with HFrEF. Successful ablation may result in improved LV function, clinical heart failure status, quality of life and possibly even mortality. This review summarises the literature analysing efficacy, safety and outcomes of AF ablation for patients with HFrEF.

Effect of Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation on Heart Failure Readmission Rates

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) cause numerous hospital admissions. We investigated if AF increases readmissions in patients with HF and whether AF ablation alters readmissions for HF exacerbations. The 2013 Nationwide Readmissions Database was analyzed for all-cause 90-day readmissions, after discharge for HF exacerbation. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare hazard rates for readmissions due to HF exacerbation, after recent ablation versus no ablation. There were 885,270 admissions for HF exacerbation of which 364,447 had coexisting AF. All-cause 90-day readmission rates were higher in patients with HF with coexisting AF versus those without AF (41.4% vs 37.6%, p <0.0001). Associated factors increasing all-cause 90-day readmissions after ablation in patients without HF were female (odds ratio [OR] 1.44, p <0.001), complication of ablation (OR 1.44, p = 0.022), coronary artery disease (OR 1.56, p <0.001), chronic lung disease (OR 1.74, p <0.001), and malnutrition (OR 10.33, p <0.001). These factors were not significant for patients with HF. HF was not a significant risk factor for complications of ablation (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 1.18). Patients who underwent ablation versus patients who were discharged after HF exacerbation without ablation had a lower rate and length of stay for the 90-day readmission episode, due to HF exacerbation (27.5% vs 41.4%, p <0.0001, and 5.58 days vs 6.60 days, p = 0.031, respectively). In conclusion, AF increased 90-day readmissions in patients with HF, and ablation for AF in patients with HF was associated with reduced frequency, length of stay, and readmissions without an increase in complication rates.