Key result
Lower left atrial septal fibrosis predicts AIC, affecting ~61% of persistent AF patients with LVSD.
Why the study?
Arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy is diagnosed after complete recovery of LV systolic function following ablation, but its prevalence and pre-ablation predictors in patients with AF and LVSD needed identification.
Does pre-ablation LGE-CMR predict arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation and left ventricular systolic dysfunction undergoing ablation?
Observational (n=119)
Does pre-ablation LGE-CMR predict arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation and left ventricular systolic dysfunction undergoing ablation?
In patients with persistent AF and LVSD, the majority have arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy, which can be predicted by lower left atrial septal wall fibrosis on pre-ablation LGE-CMR.
Lower septal fibrosis may identify arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy; leaves open whether pre-ablation LGE-CMR should guide decisions in persistent AF with LVSD.
AIMS: Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in heart failure reduces mortality and hospitalizations and improves ejection fraction. Arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy (AIC) is diagnosed after complete recovery of left ventricular systolic function after ablation. We aimed to identify the prevalence and pre-ablation predictors of AIC among patients with AF and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). METHODS AND RESULTS: We utilized the DECAAF II database, where 815 patients with persistent AF underwent late gadolinium enhancement cardiac magnetic-resonance imaging (LGE-CMR) before and 3 months after AF ablation. We only included patients with available left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and LVSD. AF burden was continuously monitored. AIC was defined as LVSD and coexisting AF in patients with ejection fraction improvement to ≥50% following ablation. We identified 119 patients with LVSD and AF with a mean LVEF of 39.1 ± 7.8% and mean baseline fibrosis of 20.0 ± 7.3%. Mean AF burden post-ablation was 16.8 ± 20.2%, and mean LVEF recovery was 13.9 percentage points. Seventy-two patients (60.5%) fulfilled the criteria for AIC, and 47 (39.5%) did not. AIC patients had a mean baseline LVEF of 39.1 ± 7.9% (vs. 39.2 ± 7.9% in non-AIC patients; p = 0.9), a significantly lower percentage of fibrosis in the left atrial septal wall (12.2 ± 10.0% vs. 20.7 ± 11.4% in non-AIC patients, p < 0.001). Additionally, LVEF improvement was correlated with lower AF burden post-ablation (r = -0.23, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In this post-hoc analysis of the DECAAF II trial, we found that the majority of patients with LVSD and persistent AF have AIC rather than primary cardiomyopathy. We identified LGE-CMR as a differentiator between AIC and other cardiomyopathies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Assaf et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Persistent atrial fibrillation and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (n=119). Atrial fibrillation ablation vs. Non-AIC patients was evaluated on Percentage of fibrosis in the left atrial septal wall in AIC vs non-AIC patients (p=<0.001). In patients with persistent AF and LVSD undergoing ablation, 60.5% had arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy, predicted by lower left atrial septal wall fibrosis (12.2% vs 20.7%, P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: