Key result
PVI plus STAR mapping linked to ~60% lower AF/AT recurrence versus PVI alone or conventional ablation.
Why the study?
The optimal ablation approach for persistent AF remains unclear.
Does PVI plus STAR mapping guided ablation improve freedom from AF/AT in patients with persistent AF compared to PVI alone or conventional ablation?
Cohort (n=180)
Does PVI plus STAR mapping guided ablation improve freedom from AF/AT in patients with persistent AF compared to PVI alone or conventional ablation?
STAR mapping guided ablation in addition to PVI significantly improves long-term freedom from arrhythmias compared to PVI alone or conventional ablation strategies in patients with persistent AF.
May support STAR mapping adjunct to PVI in persistent AF; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
INTRODUCTION: The optimal ablation approach for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) remains unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: Objective was to compare the long-term rates of freedom from AF/AT in patients that underwent STAR mapping guided ablation against outcomes of patients undergoing conventional ablation procedures. Patients undergoing ablation for persistent AF as part of the Stochastic Trajectory Analysis of Ranked signals (STAR) mapping study were included. Outcomes following 'pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus STAR mapping guided ablation (STAR mapping cohort) were compared to patients undergoing PVI alone ablation during the same time period and also a propensity-matched cohort undergoing PVI plus the addition of complex fractionated electrogram (CFAE) and/or linear ablation ("conventional ablation"). Rates of procedural AF termination and freedom from AF/AT during follow-up were compared. Sixty-five patients were included in both the STAR cohort and propensity matched conventional ablation cohort. AF termination rates were significantly higher in the STAR cohort (51/65, 78.5%) than conventional ablation cohort (10/65, 15.4%) and PVI alone ablation cohort (13/50, 26.0%; STAR cohort vs. other 2 cohorts both p < .001). There was no significant difference in procedure time between the three cohorts. During ≥20 months follow-up a lower proportion of patients had AF/AT recurrence in the STAR cohort (20.0%) compared with the conventional ablation cohort (50.8%) or the PVI alone ablation cohort (50.0%; both p < .05 compared to STAR cohort). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of PVI plus STAR mapping guided ablation was superior to PVI alone or in combination with linear/CFAE ablation. A multicenter randomized controlled trial is planned to confirm these findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Honarbakhsh et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) (n=180). Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus STAR mapping guided ablation vs. PVI alone or PVI plus CFAE/linear ablation was evaluated on AF/AT recurrence (p=<0.05). PVI plus STAR mapping guided ablation was superior to PVI alone or conventional ablation for reducing AF/AT recurrence (20.0% vs 50.0% and 50.8%, respectively; p<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: