Key result
FIRM-guided ablation alone fails to match PVI for preventing AF/AT recurrence at 12 months.
Why the study?
While PVI is the gold standard for AF ablation, ablation targeting rotors or focal sources has emerged, but whether FIRM-guided ablation alone is safe and effective compared with PVI was unknown.
Does FIRM-guided radiofrequency ablation without PVI improve acute and long-term success compared to PVI in patients with paroxysmal AF?
RCT (n=51)
Yes
Does FIRM-guided radiofrequency ablation without PVI improve acute and long-term success compared to PVI in patients with paroxysmal AF?
Absolute Event Rate: 31.3% vs 80%
FIRM-guided ablation alone is substantially less effective than PVI for paroxysmal AF, reinforcing PVI as the standard approach.
FIRM ablation without PVI should not be used in paroxysmal AF; confirms PVI as the essential strategy.
AIMS: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the gold standard for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Recently, catheter ablation targeting rotors or focal sources has been developed for treatment of AF. This study sought to compare the safety and effectiveness of Focal Impulse and Rotor Modulation (FIRM)-guided ablation as the sole ablative strategy with PVI in patients with paroxysmal AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a multicentre, randomized trial to determine whether FIRM-guided radiofrequency ablation without PVI (FIRM group) was non-inferior to PVI (PVI group) for treatment of paroxysmal AF. The two primary efficacy end points were (i) acute success defined as elimination of AF rotors (FIRM group) or isolation of all pulmonary veins (PVI group) and (ii) long-term success defined as single-procedure freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) recurrence 12 months after ablation. The study was closed early by the sponsor. At the time of study closure, any pending follow-up visits were waived. A total of 51 patients (mean age 63 ± 10.6 years, 57% male) were enrolled. All PVs were successfully isolated in the PVI group and all rotors were successfully eliminated in the FIRM group. Single-procedure effectiveness was 31.3% (5/16) in the FIRM group and 80% (8/10) in the PVI group at 12 months. Three vascular access complications occurred in the FIRM group. CONCLUSION: These partial study effectiveness results reinforce the importance of PVI in paroxysmal AF patients and indicate that FIRM-guided ablation alone (without PVI) is not an effective strategy for treatment of paroxysmal AF in most patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tilz et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (n=51). Focal Impulse and Rotor Modulation (FIRM)-guided radiofrequency ablation without PVI vs. Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was evaluated on Single-procedure freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) recurrence 12 months after ablation. FIRM-guided ablation alone without PVI resulted in lower single-procedure freedom from AF/AT recurrence at 12 months compared to PVI (31.3% vs 80%), indicating it is not an effective strategy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: