Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of contact force sensing on the safety and efficacy of atrial fibrillation ablation: discrepancy between observational studies and randomized control trial data

Contact force sensing manual catheter versus remote magnetic navigation ablation of atrial fibrillation: a single-center comparison

BACKGROUND

Data comparing remote magnetic catheter navigation (RMN) with manual catheter navigation in combination with contact force sensing (MCN-CF) ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is lacking. The primary aim of the present retrospective comparative study was to compare the outcome of RMN versus (vs.) MCN-CF ablation of AF with regards to AF recurrence. Secondary aim was to analyze periprocedural risk, ablation characteristics and repeat procedures.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 452 patients undergoing a total of 605 ablations of AF: 180 patients were ablated using RMN, 272 using MCN-CF.

RESULTS

Except body mass index there was no significant difference between groups at baseline. After a mean 1.6 ± 1.6 years of follow-up and 1.3 ± 0.4 procedures, 81% of the patients in the MCN-CF group remained free of AF recurrence compared to 53% in the RMN group (P < 0.001). After analysis of 153 repeat ablations (83 MCN-RF vs. 70 RMN; P = 0.18), there was a significantly higher reconnection rate of pulmonary veins after RMN ablation (P < 0.001). In multivariable Cox-regression analysis, RMN ablation (P < 0.001) and left atrial diameter (P = 0.013) was an independent risk factor for AF recurrence. Procedure time, radiofrequency application time and total fluoroscopy time and fluoroscopy dose were higher in the RMN group without difference in total number of ablation points. Complication rates did not differ significantly between groups (P = 0.722).

CONCLUSIONS

In our retrospective comparative study, the AF recurrence rate and pulmonary vein reconnection rate is significantly lower with more favorable procedural characteristics and similar complication rate utilizing MCN-CF compared to RMN.

Characterizing lesion morphology of a novel diamond-tip temperature-controlled irrigated radiofrequency ablation catheter

BACKGROUND

The DiamondTemp ablation (DTA) system is a novel temperature-controlled irrigated radiofrequency (RF) ablation system that accurately measures tip-tissue temperatures for real-time power modulation. Lesion morphologies from longer RF durations with the DTA system have not been previously described. We sought to evaluate lesion characteristics of the DTA system when varying the application durations.

METHODS

A bench model using porcine myocardium was used to deliver discrete lesions in a simulated clinical environment. The DTA system was power-limited at 50 W with temperature set-points of 50 °C and 60 °C (denoted Group_50 and Group_60). Application durations were randomized with a range of 5-120 s.

RESULTS

In total, 280 applications were performed. Steam pops were observed in five applications: two applications at 90 s and three applications at 120 s. Lesion size (depth and maximum width) increased significantly with longer applications, until 60 s for both Group_50 and Group_60 (depth: 4.5 ± 1.2 mm and 5.6 ± 1.3 mm; maximum width: 9.3 ± 2.7mm and 11.2 ± 1.7mm, respectively). As lesions transition from resistive to conductive heating (longer than 10 s), the maximum width progressed in a sub-surface propagation. Using a "Time after Temperature 60 °C" (TaT60) analysis, depths of 2-3 mm occur in 0-5 s and depths plateau at 4.6 ± 0.8 mm between 20 and 30 s.

CONCLUSIONS

The DTA system rapidly creates wide lesions with lesion depth increasing over time with application durations up to 60 s. Using a TaT60 approach is a promising ablation guidance that would benefit from further investigation.

Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials: a meta-epidemiological study

BACKGROUND

Researchers and decision-makers often use evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the efficacy or effectiveness of a treatment or intervention. Studies with observational designs are often used to measure the effectiveness of an intervention in 'real world' scenarios. Numerous study designs and their modifications (including both randomised and observational designs) are used for comparative effectiveness research in an attempt to give an unbiased estimate of whether one treatment is more effective or safer than another for a particular population. An up-to-date systematic analysis is needed to identify differences in effect estimates from RCTs and observational studies. This updated review summarises the results of methodological reviews that compared the effect estimates of observational studies with RCTs from evidence syntheses that addressed the same health research question.

OBJECTIVES

To assess and compare synthesised effect estimates by study type, contrasting RCTs with observational studies. To explore factors that might explain differences in synthesised effect estimates from RCTs versus observational studies (e.g. heterogeneity, type of observational study design, type of intervention, and use of propensity score adjustment). To identify gaps in the existing research comparing effect estimates across different study types.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science databases, and Epistemonikos to May 2022. We checked references, conducted citation searches, and contacted review authors to identify additional reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included systematic methodological reviews that compared quantitative effect estimates measuring the efficacy or effectiveness of interventions tested in RCTs versus in observational studies. The included reviews compared RCTs to observational studies (including retrospective and prospective cohort, case-control and cross-sectional designs). Reviews were not eligible if they compared RCTs with studies that had used some form of concurrent allocation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using results from observational studies as the reference group, we examined the relative summary effect estimates (risk ratios (RRs), odds ratios (ORs), hazard ratios (HRs), mean differences (MDs), and standardised mean differences (SMDs)) to evaluate whether there was a relatively larger or smaller effect in the ratio of odds ratios (ROR) or ratio of risk ratios (RRR), ratio of hazard ratios (RHR), and difference in (standardised) mean differences (D(S)MD). If an included review did not provide an estimate comparing results from RCTs with observational studies, we generated one by pooling the estimates for observational studies and RCTs, respectively. Across all reviews, we synthesised these ratios to produce a pooled ratio of ratios comparing effect estimates from RCTs with those from observational studies. In overviews of reviews, we estimated the ROR or RRR for each overview using observational studies as the reference category. We appraised the risk of bias in the included reviews (using nine criteria in total). To receive an overall low risk of bias rating, an included review needed: explicit criteria for study selection, a complete sample of studies, and to have controlled for study methodological differences and study heterogeneity. We assessed reviews/overviews not meeting these four criteria as having an overall high risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of the evidence, consisting of multiple evidence syntheses, with the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 39 systematic reviews and eight overviews of reviews, for a total of 47. Thirty-four of these contributed data to our primary analysis. Based on the available data, we found that the reviews/overviews included 2869 RCTs involving 3,882,115 participants, and 3924 observational studies with 19,499,970 participants. We rated 11 reviews/overviews as having an overall low risk of bias, and 36 as having an unclear or high risk of bias. Our main concerns with the included reviews/overviews were that some did not assess the quality of their included studies, and some failed to account appropriately for differences between study designs - for example, they conducted aggregate analyses of all observational studies rather than separate analyses of cohort and case-control studies. When pooling RORs and RRRs, the ratio of ratios indicated no difference or a very small difference between the effect estimates from RCTs versus from observational studies (ratio of ratios 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.15). We rated the certainty of the evidence as low. Twenty-three of 34 reviews reported effect estimates of RCTs and observational studies that were on average in agreement. In a number of subgroup analyses, small differences in the effect estimates were detected: - pharmaceutical interventions only (ratio of ratios 1.12, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.21); - RCTs and observational studies with substantial or high heterogeneity; that is, I2 ≥ 50% (ratio of ratios 1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.18); - no use (ratio of ratios 1.07, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.11) or unclear use (ratio of ratios 1.13, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.25) of propensity score adjustment in observational studies; and - observational studies without further specification of the study design (ratio of ratios 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.18). We detected no clear difference in other subgroup analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no difference or a very small difference between effect estimates from RCTs and observational studies. These findings are largely consistent with findings from recently published research. Factors other than study design need to be considered when exploring reasons for a lack of agreement between results of RCTs and observational studies, such as differences in the population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes investigated in the respective studies. Our results underscore that it is important for review authors to consider not only study design, but the level of heterogeneity in meta-analyses of RCTs or observational studies. A better understanding is needed of how these factors might yield estimates reflective of true effectiveness.

Freedom from atrial arrhythmia and other clinical outcomes at 5 years and beyond after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is now a mainstream procedure although long-term outcomes are uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of procedural outcomes at 5 years and beyond.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched PubMed and Embase and after the screening, identified 73 studies (67 159 patients) reporting freedom from atrial arrhythmia, all-cause death, stroke, and major bleeding at ≥5 years after AF ablation. The pooled mean age was 59.7y, 71.5% male, 62.2% paroxysmal AF, and radiofrequency was used in 78.1% of studies. Pooled incidence of freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 5 years was 50.6% (95%CI 45.5-55.7%) after a single ablation and 69.7% [95%CI (confidence interval) 63.8-75.3%) after multiple procedures. The incidence was higher among patients with paroxysmal compared with non-paroxysmal AF after single (59.7% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.002) and multiple (80.8% vs. 60.6%, p < 0.001) ablations but was comparable between radiofrequency and cryoablation. Pooled incidences of other outcomes were 6.0% (95%CI 3.2-9.7%) for death, 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.7%) for stroke, and 1.2% (95%CI 0.8-2.0%) for major bleeding at 5 years. Beyond 5 years, freedom from arrhythmia recurrence remained largely stable (52.3% and 64.7% after single and multiple procedures at 10 years), while the risk of stroke and bleeding increased over time.

CONCLUSION

Nearly 70% of patients having multiple ablations remained free from atrial arrhythmia at 5 years, with the incidence slightly decreasing beyond this period. Risk of death, stroke, and major bleeding at 5 years were low but increased over time, emphasizing the importance of long-term thromboembolism prevention and bleeding risk management.

High-Frequency Low-Tidal Volume Ventilation Improves Long-Term Outcomes in AF Ablation: A Multicenter Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

High-frequency, low-tidal-volume (HFLTV) ventilation is a safe and simple strategy to improve catheter stability and first-pass isolation during pulmonary vein (PV) isolation. However, the impact of this technique on long-term clinical outcomes has not been determined.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess acute and long-term outcomes of HFLTV ventilation compared with standard ventilation (SV) during radiofrequency (RF) ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF).

METHODS

In this prospective multicenter registry (REAL-AF), patients undergoing PAF ablation using either HFLTV or SV were included. The primary outcome was freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included procedural characteristics, AF-related symptoms, and hospitalizations at 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 661 patients were included. Compared with those in the SV group, patients in the HFLTV group had shorter procedural (66 [IQR: 51-88] minutes vs 80 [IQR: 61-110] minutes; P < 0.001), total RF (13.5 [IQR: 10-19] minutes vs 19.9 [IQR: 14.7-26.9] minutes; P < 0.001), and PV RF (11.1 [IQR: 8.8-14] minutes vs 15.3 [IQR: 12.4-20.4] minutes; P < 0.001) times. First-pass PV isolation was higher in the HFLTV group (66.6% vs 63.8%; P = 0.036). At 12 months, 185 of 216 (85.6%) in the HFLTV group were free from all-atrial arrhythmia, compared with 353 of 445 (79.3%) patients in the SV group (P = 0.041). HLTV was associated with a 6.3% absolute reduction in all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence, lower rate of AF-related symptoms (12.5% vs 18.9%; P = 0.046), and hospitalizations (1.4% vs 4.7%; P = 0.043). There was no significant difference in the rate of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

HFLTV ventilation during catheter ablation of PAF improved freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence, AF-related symptoms, and AF-related hospitalizations with shorter procedural times.

Contact Force-Guided versus Contact Force-Blinded Cavo-Tricuspid Isthmus Ablation for Atrial Flutter: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact force (CF) is a novel approach developed to increase the safety and efficacy of catheter ablation. However, the value of CF-sensing technology for atrial flutter (AFL) cavo-tricuspid isthmus ablation (CTIA) is inconclusive. To generate a comprehensive assessment of optimal extant data on CF for AFL, we synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies from Web of Science, SCOPUS, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane until 29 November 2022, using the odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Two RCTs and three observational studies with a total of 376 patients were included in our analysis. CF-guided ablation was associated with (A) a higher rate of AFL recurrence (OR: 2.26 with 95% CI [1.05, 4.87]) and total CF (MD: 2.71 with 95% CI [1.28, 4.13]); (B) no effect on total procedure duration (MD: -2.88 with 95% CI [-7.48, 1.72]), fluoroscopy duration (MD: -0.96 with 95% CI [-2.24, 0.31]), and bidirectional isthmus block (BDIB) (OR: 1.50 with 95% CI [0.72, 3.11]); and (C) decreased radiofrequency (RF) duration (MD: -1.40 with 95% CI [-2.39, -0.41]). We conclude that although CF-guided CTIA was associated with increased AFL recurrence and total CF and reduced RF duration, it did not affect total procedure duration, fluoroscopy duration, or BDIB. Thus, CF-guided CTIA may not be the optimal intervention for AFL. These findings indicate the need for (A) providers to balance the benefits and risks of CF when utilizing precision medicine to develop treatment plans for individuals with AFL and (B) clinical trials investigating CF-guided catheter ablation for AFL to provide definitive evidence of optimal CF-sensing technology.

Trends over the recent 6 years in ablation modalities and strategies, post-ablation medication, and clinical outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablation

Background

Ablation strategies and modalities for atrial fibrillation (AF) have transitioned over the past decade, but their impact on post-ablation medication and clinical outcomes remains to be fully investigated.

Methods

We divided 682 patients who had undergone AF ablation in 2014-2019 (420 paroxysmal AFs [PAF], 262 persistent AFs [PerAF]) into three groups according to the period, that is, the 2014-2015 (n = 139), 2016-2017 (n = 244), and 2018-2019 groups (n = 299), respectively.

Results

Persistent AF became more prevalent and the left atrial (LA) diameter larger over the 6 years. Extra-pulmonary vein (PV)-LA ablation was more frequently performed in the 2014-2015 group than in the 2016-2017 and 2018-2019 groups (41.1% vs. 9.1% and 8.1%; p < .001). The 2-year freedom rate from AF/atrial tachycardias for PAF was similar among the three groups (84.0% vs. 83.1% vs. 86.7%; p = .98) but lowest in the 2014-2015 group for PerAF (63.9% vs. 82.7% and 86.3%; p = .025) despite the highest post-ablation antiarrhythmic drug use. Cardiac tamponade was significantly decreased in the 2018-2019 group (3.6% vs. 2.0% vs. 0.33%; p = 0.021). There was no difference in the 2-year clinically relevant events among the three groups.

Conclusion

Although ablation was performed in a more diseased LA and extra-PV-LA ablation was less frequent in recent years, the complication rate decreased, and AF recurrences for PAF remained unchanged, but that for PerAF decreased. Clinically relevant events remained unchanged over the recent 6 years, suggesting that the impact of the recent ablation modalities and strategies on remote clinically relevant events may be small during this study period.

Cavotricuspid isthmus ablation for atrial flutter guided by contact force related parameters: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Contact force (CF) and related parameters have been evaluated as an effective guide mark for pulmonary vein isolation, yet not for linear ablation of the cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) dependent atrial flutter (AFL). We thus studied the efficacy and safety of CF related parameter-guided ablation for CTI-AFL.

Methods

Systematic search was performed on databases involving PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science (through June 2022). Original articles comparing CF related parameter-guided ablation and conventional parameter-guided ablation for CTI-AFL were included. One-by-one elimination, subgroup analysis and meta-regression were used for heterogeneity test between studies.

Results

Ten studies reporting on 761 patients were identified after screening with inclusion and exclusion criteria. Radiofrequency (RF) duration was significantly shorter in CF related parameter-guided group (p = 0.01), while procedural time (p = 0.13) and fluoroscopy time (p = 0.07) were no significant difference between two groups. CF related parameter-guided group had less RF lesions (p = 0.0003) and greater CF of catheter-tissue (p = 0.0002). Touch-up needed after first ablation line was less in CF related parameter-guided group (p = 0.004). In addition, there were no statistical significance between two groups on acute conduction recovery rates (p = 0.25), recurrence rates (p = 0.92), and complication rates (p = 0.80). Meta-regression analysis revealed no specific covariate as an influencing factor for above results (p > 0.10).

Conclusion

CF related parameters guidance improves the efficiency of CTI ablation, with the better catheter-tissue contact, the lower RF duration and the comparable safety as compared with conventional method, but does not improve the acute success rate and long-term outcome.

Recurrent atrial arrhythmia in a randomised controlled trial comparing contact force-guided and contact force-blinded ablation for typical atrial flutter

BACKGROUND

Contact force (CF)-guided catheter ablation (CA) is a novel technology developed to improve efficacy and reduce complications. In a randomised controlled trial (RCT), we previously documented that after 3 months, rate of persistent conduction block was similar with and without using CF while performing CA for typical atrial flutter (AFL). Clinical effect of CF on recurrent arrhythmia is unknown. Our objective is to study recurrent atrial arrhythmia during 12-month follow-up in a RCT investigating whether CF-guided CA for typical AFL is superior to CF-blinded CA.

METHODS

Patients were randomised 1:1 to CA guided by CF (intervention group) or blinded to CF (control group). After 12 months, patients attended clinical check-up preceded by a 5-day ambulatory Holter monitor recording. Primary outcome was any recurrent atrial arrhythmia ≥ 30 s within 12 months and documented in 12-lead ECG or Holter monitor recording.

RESULTS

We included 156 patients, four patients withdrew consent and two died during follow-up. Thus, 150 patients were included in final analysis. Recurrent arrhythmia was detected in 36 of 77 (47%) patients in the intervention group, and 32 of 73 patients (44%) in the control group (p = 0.51). Atrial fibrillation was detected in 23 (30%) and 29 (40%) patients in the intervention and control groups respectively. AFL was detected in 11 (14%) and 5 (7%) patients in the intervention and control groups respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Contact force-guided ablation for typical atrial flutter does not reduce recurrent atrial arrhythmia after 12-month follow-up as compared with ablation blinded for contact force.

Impact of open-irrigated radiofrequency catheter with contact force measurement on the efficacy and safety of atrial fibrillation ablation: a single-center direct comparison

BACKGROUND

In atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, catheter ablation of pulmonary veins (PVI) is the most effective therapeutic option to maintain sinus rhythm. To improve successful PVI, contact force-sensing (CF) catheters became routinely available. Previous studies did not clearly show superior clinical efficacy in comparison with non-CF catheters.

METHODS

We investigated consecutive patients, who underwent index PVI for AF at our hospital between 2012 and 2018. Three hundred and fifty-four patients were ablated without CF. After availability of CF catheters in 2016, 317 patients were ablated using CF. In case of crossover between the groups, follow-up was censored. The primary endpoint was any documented atrial tachycardia (AT) or atrial fibrillation > 30 s after a 3-month blanking period. Secondary endpoints were procedural characteristics and periprocedural complications.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the groups at baseline except hyperlipidemia. After 365 days of follow-up, 67% of patients in the CF group remained free from AF/AT recurrence compared to 59% in non-CF group (P = 0.038). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, non-CF ablation was an independent risk factor for AF recurrence besides age and persistent AF. Total fluoroscopy time (15 ± 7.6 vs. 28 ± 15.9 min) and total procedure time (114 ± 29.6 vs. 136 ± 38.5 min) were significantly lower for CF-guided PVI (P < 0.001). Complication rates did not differ between groups (P = 0.661).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, the AT/AF recurrence rate and pulmonary vein reconnection rate is lower after CF PVI with a similar complication rate but lower total procedure time and total fluoroscopy time compared to non-CF PVI.

Radiofrequency ablation to achieve durable pulmonary vein isolation

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) by radiofrequency (RF) ablation is an important alternative to antiarrhythmic drugs in the treatment of symptomatic atrial fibrillation. However, the inability to consistently achieve durable isolation of the pulmonary veins hampers the long-term efficacy of PVI procedures. The large number of factors involved in RF lesion formation and the complex interplay of these factors complicate reliable creation of durable and transmural ablation lesions. Various surrogate markers of ablation lesion formation have been proposed that may provide information on RF lesion completeness. Real-time assessment of these surrogates may aid in the creation of transmural ablation lesions, and therefore, holds potential to decrease the risk of PV reconnection and consequent post-PVI arrhythmia recurrence. Moreover, titration of energy delivery until lesions is transmural may prevent unnecessary ablation and subsequent adverse events. Whereas several surrogate markers of ablation lesion formation have been described over the past decades, a 'gold standard' is currently lacking. This review provides a state-of-the-art overview of ablation strategies that aim to enhance durability of RF-PVI, with special focus on real-time available surrogates of RF lesion formation in light of the biophysical basis of RF ablation.

The impacts of contact force, power and application time on ablation effect indicated by serial measurements of impedance drop in both conventional and high-power short-duration ablation settings of atrial fibrillation

Background

This study aimed to clarify the interrelationship and additive effects of contact force (CF), power and application time in both conventional and high-power short-duration (HPSD) settings.

Methods

Among 38 patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation who underwent first-time pulmonary vein isolation, 787 ablation points were collected at the beginning of the procedure at separate sites. Energy was applied for 60 s under power outputs of 25, 30 or 35 W (conventional group), or 10 s when using 50 W (HPSD group). An impedance drop (ID) of 10 Ω was regarded as a marker of adequate lesion formation.

Results

ID ≥ 10 Ω could not be achieved with CF < 5 g under any power setting. With CF ≥ 5 g, ID could be enhanced by increasing power output or prolonging ablation time. ID for 30 and 35 W was greater than for 25 W (p < 0.05). Ablation with 35 W resulted in greater ID than with 30 W only when CF of 10–20 g was applied for 20–40 s (p < 0.05). Under the same power output, ID increased with CF level at different time points. The higher the CF, the shorter the time needed to reach ID of 10 Ω and maximal ID. ID correlated well with ablation index under each power, except for lower ID values at 25 W. ID with 50 W for 10 s was equivalent to that with 25 W for 40 s, but lower than that with 30 W for 40 s or 35 W for 30 s.

Conclusions

CF of at least 5 g is required for adequate ablation effect. With CF ≥ 5g, CF, power output, and ablation time can compensate for each other. Time to reach maximal ablation effect can be shortened by increasing CF or power. The effect of HPSD ablation with 50 W for 10 s is equivalent to conventional ablation with 25 W for 40 s and 30–35 W for 20–30 s in terms of ID.

Cryoballoon vs radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation: insights from the Veterans Healthcare System

PURPOSE

Catheter ablation is considered the mainstay treatment for drug-refractory atrial fibrillation (AF). The aims of our study were to compare the efficacy and safety of the most two currently approved approaches (point-by-point radiofrequency ablation (RFA), either with contact force (CF) or without contact force (nCF) catheters, and cryoballoon ablation (CBA)) in the Veterans Healthcare System.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent ablation for treatment of AF at the veterans affairs healthcare system between 2013 and 2018. Only the first reported ablation procedure was included.

RESULTS

We included 956 patients in the study (97.4% males, 91.5% Caucasians, 67% paroxysmal AF), with 682 patients in RFA-nCF, 139 in RFA-CF, and 135 in CBA. Thirty-day complication rates were comparable between the three groups with the exception of higher incidence of phrenic nerve injury in CBA group when compared to RFA-nCF (2.2% vs 0.0%, p < 0.01). Long-term recurrence rate of AF was significantly lower in the CBA group when compared to RFA-nCF (33.3% vs 47.7%, adjusted HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44-0.83, p < 0.01). On the other hand, it was similar between RFA-CF and RFA-nCF groups (43.9% vs 47.7%, adjusted HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.76-1.33, p 0.97). After stratifying patients based on AF type, these findings were only present in patients with paroxysmal AF.

CONCLUSION

CBA for paroxysmal AF, in male dominant patients' population, was associated with lower incidence of AF recurrence rate while having a comparable safety profile to RFA independent of the use of CF catheters.

Triple gastrointestinal prophylactic therapy following high-power short-duration posterior left atrial wall ablation

The purpose of this study is to investigate incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms and complications in patients who underwent high-power short-duration (HPSD), posterior left atrial wall isolation during atrial fibrillation ablation and thereafter have received gastrointestinal prophylactic regimen consisting of sucralfate, proton-pump inhibitor and colchicine. Patients were followed and assessed at baseline, up until 6th month following the procedures.Among 115 patients who were included, 5 patients (4.3%) reported gastrointestinal symptoms at follow-up. No complications were diagnosed during the follow-up. In conclusion, the HPSD along with prophylactic regimen has been associated with low incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events.

The evolution of mapping and ablation techniques in the treatment of atrial tachycardias occurring after atrial fibrillation ablation

PURPOSE

A possible consequence of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is the occurrence of organized atrial tachycardias (ATs). ATs after AF ablation (ATAAF) may be more symptomatic than AF itself, thus necessitating catheter ablation. We evaluated the prognostic significance of clinical and invasive characteristics for long-term sinus rhythm (SR) maintenance following ATAAF ablation and assessed the effect of technological developments on these results.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fifty-six consecutive patients with symptomatic ATAAF participated in the study and 114 ATAAF were revealed (2.04 ± 0.93 per patient). Sixty-eight ATAAF (60%) were macroreentrant and 33 (29%) were microreentrant circuits, while 13 (11%) were focal automatic tachycardias. The mean follow-up was 40 ± 18 months with 34 (61%) patients maintaining SR. Treatment with contact force (CF) catheters and EnSite AutoMap module (n = 11) showed significantly better AT/AF free rates at 1-year follow-up (10/11, 91%) compared with treatment using CF catheters but not AutoMap module (n = 13) (8/13, 62%) and treatment with use of neither of these modalities (n = 32) (16/32, 50%). Among patients with macroreentrant circuits around the mitral annulus or left atrial roof (n = 38), the group treated with complete linear lesions in anatomical isthmuses (n = 25) showed significantly better SR maintenance (19/25, 76%) compared with patients (n = 13) treated by empirical ablation in critical functional areas (6/13, 46%).

CONCLUSIONS

Technology advancement contributes substantially to long-term success in SR maintenance, by achieving detailed mapping and more effective ablation of ATAAF. The targeting of macroreentrant circuits by creating anatomical linear lesions appears to provide better results.

Introducing a novel catheter-tissue contact feedback feature in robotic navigated catheter ablation: Utility, feasibility, and safety

Background

The quality of catheter–tissue contact is one of the most important determinants of catheter ablation (CA) success. The absence of catheter–tissue contact feedback has been regarded a major limitation of remote magnetic navigation (RMN)–guided CA. The e-Contact module (ECM) is a novel feature designed for RMN that measures the quality of catheter–tissue contact.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to describe the first clinical experience with this feature and to test its effect on procedural parameters and interference with other ablation equipment during CA procedures as well as its safety.

Methods

This was a prospective, single-center, 2-phase study investigating ECM use during complex RMN procedures in 30 patients. Impact of ECM on procedural parameters was evaluated in the feasibility phase (FP), and its interference with other equipment was tested in the interference phase (IP) using pacing maneuvers at 3 randomly selected right atrial sites. Intracardiac electrograms were evaluated for disturbances by 2 independent electrophysiologists.

Results

For FP, mean procedural time was 162 ± 66 minutes, fluoroscopy time 21 ± 9 minutes, and ablation time 34 ± 21 minutes. For IP, no significant differences in pacing capture or thresholds were found (ECM– vs ECM+: site 1: 2.05 vs 2.21 mA; P = .320; site 2: 2.15 vs 2.12 mA; P = .873; site 3: 2.51 vs 2.50 mA; P = .976). Electrogram disturbances did not significantly differ between ECM– and ECM+. No adverse events were reported.

Conclusion

The ECM is a novel catheter–tissue contact technology designed for RMN-guided CA. Our study suggests that this feature is feasible and does not interfere with other electrophysiology equipment while maintaining an excellent safety profile.

A randomized trial of contact force in atrial flutter ablation

Aims

Contact force (CF) sensing has emerged as a tool to guide and improve outcomes for catheter ablation (CA) for cardiac arrhythmias. The clinical benefit on patient outcomes remains unknown. To study whether CF-guided CA for typical atrial flutter (AFL) is superior to CA not guided by CF.

Methods and results

In a double-blinded controlled superiority trial, we randomized patients 1:1 to receive CA for typical AFL guided by CF (intervention group) or blinded to CF (control group). In the intervention group, a specific value of the lesion size index (LSI), estimating ablation lesions size was targeted for each ablation lesion. Patients underwent electrophysiological study (EPS) after 3 months to assess occurrence of the primary endpoint of re-conduction across the cavo-tricuspid isthmus (CTI). We included 156 patients with typical AFL, median age was 68 [interquartile range (IQR) 61–74] years and 120 (77%) patients were male. At index procedure median LSI was higher in the intervention group [6.4 (IQR 5.1–7) vs. 5.6 (IQR 4.5–6.9), P &lt; 0.0001]. After 3 months, 126 patients (58 in intervention group) underwent EPS for primary endpoint assessment. Thirty (24%) patients had CTI re-conduction, distributed with 15 patients in each treatment group (P = 0.62). We observed no difference between treatment groups with regard to fluoroscopy, ablation, or procedure times, nor peri-procedural complications.

Conclusion

Contact force-guided ablation does not reduce re-conduction across the CTI after 3 months, nor does CF-guided ablation shorten fluoroscopy, ablation, or total procedure times.

Intraprocedural endpoints to predict durable pulmonary vein isolation: a randomized trial of four post-ablation techniques

AIMS

The optimal procedural endpoint to achieve permanent pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) during ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) remains unknown. We aimed to compare the impact of prolonged waiting periods and adenosine triphosphate (ATP) testing after PVI on long-term freedom from AF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In total, 538 patients (median age 61 years, 62% male) undergoing first-time radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal AF were randomized into four groups: Group 1 [PVI (no testing), n = 121], Group 2 (PVI + 30min waiting phase, n = 151), Group 3 (PVI+ATP, n = 131), and Group 4 (PVI + 30min+ATP, n = 135). The primary endpoint was freedom from AF. Repeat mapping to assess for late pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection was performed in patients who remained AF-free for >3 years (n = 46) and in those who had repeat ablation for AF recurrence (n = 82). During initial procedure, acute PV reconnection was observed in 33%, 26%, and 42% of patients in Groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively. At 36 months, no significant differences in freedom from AF recurrence were observed among all four groups (55%, 61%, 50%, and 62% for Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively; P = 0.258). Late PV reconnection was commonly observed, with a similar incidence between patients with and without AF recurrence (74% vs. 83%; P = 0.224).

CONCLUSION

Although PVI remains the cornerstone for AF ablation, intraprocedural techniques to assess for PV reconnection did not improve long-term success. Patients without AF recurrence after 3 years exhibited similarly high rates of PV reconnection as those that underwent repeat ablation for AF recurrence. The therapeutic mechanisms of AF ablation may not be solely predicated upon durable PVI.

Contact Force and Ablation Index

Radiofrequency ablation of arrhythmias depends on durable lesion formation. Catheter tip-tissue contact force (CF) is a key determinant of lesion quality; excessive CF is associated with major complications, whereas insufficient CF increases the risk of electrical reconnection and arrhythmia recurrence. In recent years, CF-sensing catheters have emerged with the ability to directly measure CF and provide operators with real-time feedback. CF-guided ablation has been associated with improved outcomes in observational studies. However, randomized controlled trials have not shown any reduction in procedural durations, fluoroscopy exposure, incidence of major complications, or long-term arrhythmia recurrence with use of CF-sensing catheters.

Safety and efficacy of the ThermoCool SmartTouch SurroundFlow catheter for atrial fibrillation ablation: A meta-analysis

Background

The ThermoCool Smarttouch Surroundflow catheter (STSFc) is an advanced catheter, which integrating contact force sensing and surroundflow technology. However, comparative data between STSFc and contact force sensing catheter (Thermocool SmartTouch catheter [STc]) are limited.

Hypothesis

We thought that STSFc might bring more clinical benefits. The aim of this meta‐analysis was to compare the safety and efficiency between the STSFc and the STc for treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods

The Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing STSFc and STc.

Results

Four trials involving 727 patients were included in the study. Pool‐analyses demonstrated that, as compared STc ablation, STSFc ablation was more beneficial in terms of procedural times (standard mean difference [SMD]: −0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.37 to −0.07, P = .005) and irrigation fluid volume (SMD: −1.94; 95% CI, −2.65 to −1.22, P < .0001). There was no significant difference between STSFc and STc (risk ratio [RR]: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.21, P = .79) for free from AF. Evidence of complications were low and similar for both groups (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.19‐3.55, P = .80). Additionally, patients administered STSFc ablation tended to have shorter fluoroscopic times (SMD: −0.20; 95% CI, −0.63‐0.23, P = .21).

Conclusions

STSFc ablation was associated with reducing procedural times and irrigation fluid volume. Further, STSFc ablation tended to shorten fluoroscopic times. Therefore, STSFc ablation would be a better choice for AF patients especially in patients with heart failure.