Key result
Marshall-Plan ablation boosts 1-year arrhythmia freedom to 86% vs. PVI alone.
Why the study?
The optimal ablation strategy beyond pulmonary vein isolation for persistent atrial fibrillation remains poorly defined.
Does the Marshall-Plan ablation strategy improve 1-year freedom from arrhythmia compared to pulmonary vein isolation alone in patients with symptomatic persistent atrial fibrillation?
RCT (n=120)
parallel-group
No
Does the Marshall-Plan ablation strategy improve 1-year freedom from arrhythmia compared to pulmonary vein isolation alone in patients with symptomatic persistent atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Event Rate: 86.4% vs 66.1%
p-value: p=0.012
The Marshall-Plan ablation strategy, which includes vein of Marshall ethanol infusion and linear lesions, significantly improves 1-year freedom from atrial arrhythmias compared to pulmonary vein isolation alone in patients with persistent AF.
BACKGROUND: Beyond pulmonary vein (PV) isolation, the optimal ablation strategy for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) remains poorly defined. The purpose of this study was to compare 2 ablation strategies in the treatment of patients with persistent AF: a comprehensive ablation strategy based on anatomic considerations versus PV isolation alone. METHODS: The Marshall-Plan trial is a prospective, randomized, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial of superiority conducted at the Bordeaux University Hospital. Consecutive patients with symptomatic, documented persistent AF were included and randomized into 2 arms: Marshall-Plan consisting of PV isolation with additional ablation including vein of Marshall ethanol infusion, and lines of block at the mitral, dome, and cavotricuspid isthmuses versus PV isolation alone. The main outcome was the 1-year freedom from any arrhythmia (atrial fibrillation/atrial tachycardia >30 seconds) after a single ablation procedure with or without any antiarrhythmic medication at 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients were included (age 65±8 years; 21 women). Two patients were excluded from analysis. All PVs were successfully isolated in both groups. In the Marshall-Plan group, vein of Marshall ethanol infusion was completed in 57 (97%) patients. Conduction block across linear lesions was obtained in 93%, 92%, and 93% of the mitral, dome, and cavotricuspid isthmuses, respectively. The full lesion set was successfully completed in 52 (88%) patients in the Marshall-Plan group and 59 (100%) patients in the PV isolation group. At 12 months, freedom from recurrence of atrial arrhythmia >30 seconds after 1 ablation procedure, with or without antiarrhythmic medication, had occurred in 51 of the 59 (86.4%) patients assigned to the Marshall-Plan approach, and 39 of the 59 (66.1%) patients assigned to PV isolation only ( P =0.012). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective randomized controlled trial, the Marshall-Plan strategy was significantly superior to a PV isolation strategy at 12 months. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT04206982.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Derval et al. (2025) conducted an RCT in persistent atrial fibrillation (n=120). Marshall-Plan ablation strategy vs. Pulmonary vein isolation alone was evaluated on 1-year freedom from any arrhythmia (atrial fibrillation/atrial tachycardia >30 seconds) after a single ablation procedure with or without any antiarrhythmic medication (p=0.012). The Marshall-Plan ablation strategy was significantly superior to pulmonary vein isolation alone for 1-year freedom from atrial arrhythmia (86.4% vs 66.1%, P=0.012).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: