PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 2, 2020Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology17 citationsOpen Access

Repeat pulmonary vein isolation with or without FIRM‐guided ablation for recurrent atrial fibrillation with pulmonary vein reconnection

GPGraham PeighElectrophysiologyJWJeremiah WasserlaufElectrophysiologyRKRachel M. KaplanElectrophysiology

Key Result

PVRI plus FIRM-guided ablation yielded a lower rate of freedom from atrial fibrillation compared to PVRI alone in patients with recurrent AF and PV reconnection (33.3% vs 55.6%; P=0.049).

Key Points

  • To determine whether combining focal impulse and rotor modulation (FIRM)-guided ablation with pulmonary vein reisolation improves freedom from atrial fibrillation compared to pulmonary vein reisolation alone in patients with recurrent atrial fibrillation and reconnected pulmonary veins.
  • Conducted a 3:1 matched retrospective cohort study at a single center comparing 21 patients undergoing pulmonary vein reisolation plus FIRM-guided ablation with 63 patients treated with cryoballoon pulmonary vein reisolation alone.
  • Matched cohorts on atrial fibrillation type (paroxysmal vs nonparoxysmal), left atrial diameter (±4 mm), left ventricular ejection fraction (±10%), duration of atrial fibrillation (±18 months), and age (±5 years).
  • Evaluated freedom from atrial fibrillation as the primary endpoint after a 3-month blanking period over a median follow-up of 24.7 months (interquartile range, 13–36 months).
  • Freedom from atrial fibrillation was significantly lower in the pulmonary vein reisolation plus FIRM group (n = 7; 33.3%) than in the pulmonary vein reisolation alone group (n = 35; 55.6%) (log-rank P = .049).
  • Patients receiving FIRM-guided ablation had an average of 3.3 ± 2.1 rotors ablated, with 60% located in the left atrium.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=84)

Multicenter

No

Structured PICO

Does PVRI plus FIRM-guided ablation improve freedom from atrial fibrillation in patients with recurrent AF and PV reconnection compared to PVRI alone?

P
Population
84 patients with recurrent atrial fibrillation and pulmonary vein reconnection undergoing repeat ablation (matched based on type of AF, left atrial diameter, LVEF, duration of AF, and age)
I
Intervention
Pulmonary vein reisolation (PVRI) plus Focal impulse and rotor modulation (FIRM)-guided ablation
C
Comparator
PVRI alone (cryoballoon PVRI without additional lesion sets)
O
Outcome
Freedom from atrial fibrillation (FFAF) after a 3-month blanking periodhard clinical

In patients undergoing repeat ablation for recurrent AF with PV reconnection, the addition of FIRM-guided ablation to PV reisolation did not improve, and was associated with a lower rate of, freedom from atrial fibrillation compared to PV reisolation alone.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 33.3% vs 55.6%

p-value: p=0.049

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Focal impulse and rotor modulation (FIRM) ablation can be used to target nonpulmonary vein (PV) sources of atrial fibrillation (AF). No published studies have compared freedom from atrial fibrillation (FFAF) after pulmonary vein reisolation (PVRI) plus FIRM to PVRI alone in patients with reconnected PVs undergoing repeat ablation. METHODS: A 3:1 matched retrospective cohort study was performed on 21 patients with recurrent AF and PV reconnection who underwent PVRI plus FIRM-guided ablation and 63 patients with recurrent AF treated with PVRI alone at a single institution. All patients in the PVRI-alone cohort had cryoballoon PVRI at the time of repeat ablation without additional lesion sets for AF. Cases were matched based on the type of AF (paroxysmal vs nonparoxysmal), left atrial diameter (±4 mm), left ventricular ejection fraction (±10%), duration of AF (±18 months), and age (±5 years). The primary endpoint was FFAF after a 3-month blanking period. RESULTS: Out of 53 total FIRM cases performed at Northwestern Memorial Hospital between 2015 and 2017, 21 patients had PVRI plus FIRM for recurrent AF with PV reconnection. These patients had an average of 3.3 ± 2.1 rotors (60% left atrial) ablated. Over a median follow-up time of 24.7 months (interquartile range, 13-36 months), patients in the PVRI-alone cohort demonstrated a higher rate of FFAF (n = 35; 55.6%) than patients in the PVRI plus FIRM-guided ablation cohort (n = 7; 33.3%) (logrank P = .049). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing repeat ablation for AF with PV reconnection, PVRI plus FIRM did not increase FFAF compared to PVRI alone.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Peigh et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in recurrent atrial fibrillation with pulmonary vein reconnection (n=84). Pulmonary vein reisolation (PVRI) plus FIRM-guided ablation vs. PVRI alone was evaluated on freedom from atrial fibrillation (FFAF) after a 3-month blanking period (p=0.049). PVRI plus FIRM-guided ablation yielded a lower rate of freedom from atrial fibrillation compared to PVRI alone in patients with recurrent AF and PV reconnection (33.3% vs 55.6%; P=0.049).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1c167367ec8852715ee69chttps://doi.org/10.1111/jce.14426
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper