PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
July 7, 2010Circulation644 citations

Left Atrial Appendage

View Full Paper
LBLuigi Di BiaseJBJ. David BurkhardtPMPrasant Mohanty

Key Result

Left atrial appendage isolation significantly reduced arrhythmia recurrence compared to focal ablation or no ablation (15% vs 68% and 74%, P<0.001).

Key Points

  • This study examines the role of the left atrial appendage in triggering atrial fibrillation and the effectiveness of different ablation strategies.
  • Enrolled 987 consecutive patients undergoing redo catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.
  • Identified 266 patients (27%) with firing from the left atrial appendage.
  • Performed ablation with either focal lesions or LAA isolation guided by intracardiac echocardiography.
  • 74% recurrence in group 1 (not ablated), 68% in group 2 (focal lesions), and 15% in group 3 (LAA isolation) at 12-month follow-up (P<0.001).
  • Isolation of the left atrial appendage significantly reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=266)

Structured PICO

Does left atrial appendage isolation reduce atrial fibrillation recurrence in patients undergoing redo catheter ablation with LAA triggers?

P
Population
266 patients undergoing redo catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation who demonstrated firing from the left atrial appendage (selected from an initial cohort of 987 consecutive patients, 29% paroxysmal, 71% nonparoxysmal).
I
Intervention
Left atrial appendage ablation, either via focal lesion (n=56) or LAA isolation by placement of a circular catheter at the ostium guided by intracardiac echocardiography (n=167).
C
Comparator
No ablation of left atrial appendage firing (n=43).
O
Outcome
Recurrence of atrial fibrillation at 12+/-3 months follow-up.

Left atrial appendage isolation significantly reduces atrial fibrillation recurrence compared to focal ablation or no LAA ablation in patients undergoing redo procedures with LAA triggers.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 15% vs 74%

p-value: p=<0.001

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Together with pulmonary veins, many extrapulmonary vein areas may be the source of initiation and maintenance of atrial fibrillation. The left atrial appendage (LAA) is an underestimated site of initiation of atrial fibrillation. Here, we report the prevalence of triggers from the LAA and the best strategy for successful ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Nine hundred eighty-seven consecutive patients (29% paroxysmal, 71% nonparoxysmal) undergoing redo catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation were enrolled. Two hundred sixty-six patients (27%) showed firing from the LAA and became the study population. In 86 of 987 patients (8.7%; 5 paroxysmal, 81 nonparoxysmal), the LAA was found to be the only source of arrhythmia with no pulmonary veins or other extrapulmonary vein site reconnection. Ablation was performed either with focal lesion (n=56; group 2) or to achieve LAA isolation by placement of the circular catheter at the ostium of the LAA guided by intracardiac echocardiography (167 patients; group 3). In the remaining patients, LAA firing was not ablated (n=43; group 1). At the 12+/-3-month follow-up, 32 patients (74%) in group 1 had recurrence compared with 38 (68%) in group 2 and 25 (15%) in group 3 (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The LAA appears to be responsible for arrhythmias in 27% of patients presenting for repeat procedures. Isolation of the LAA could achieve freedom from atrial fibrillation in patients presenting for a repeat procedure when arrhythmias initiating from this structure are demonstrated.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Biase et al. (2010) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (n=266). Left atrial appendage isolation vs. No ablation or focal lesion ablation was evaluated on Recurrence of arrhythmia (p=<0.001). Left atrial appendage isolation significantly reduced arrhythmia recurrence compared to focal ablation or no ablation (15% vs 68% and 74%, P<0.001).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0bd7bfdc69176b05a9411ahttps://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.109.928903
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper