Why the study?
Does minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgical ablation or nMARQ ablation improve AF outcomes compared to PVAC ablation in patients with paroxysmal AF?
Does minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgical ablation or nMARQ ablation improve AF outcomes compared to PVAC ablation in patients with paroxysmal AF?
Surgical ablation for paroxysmal AF may improve arrhythmia outcomes and reduce repeat procedures compared to catheter ablation, but carries a significantly higher risk of severe procedural complications.
Surgical ablation may improve AF freedom off drugs versus catheter approaches; extends limited RCT data but leaves safety questions open.
Aims: To investigate the effect of minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgical ablation and nMARQ irrigated multi-electrode phased radiofrequency (RF) ablation to treat paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) compared with PVAC multi-electrode phased RF ablation, with beat-to-beat device-derived Holter monitoring throughout the study duration. Methods and results: An investigator-initiated prospective trial of patients with paroxysmal AF randomized (1:1:1) to initial surgical, nMARQ or PVAC ablation. All patients had continuous beat-to-beat monitoring with an ILR or pacemaker to evaluate and document AF recurrence. There was a strong trend (P = 0.050) toward difference in AF outcome, with surgical AF ablation more efficacious than catheter ablation. At one year, the proportion of patients with less than 1% AF burden after one procedure and off all antiarrhythmic drugs was 63, 56, and 90% for PVAC, nMARQ and surgical ablations respectively. There were significantly more repeat ablations in the catheter ablation groups (P = 0.008): 25% PVAC, 27% nMARQ, 0% surgery. However, 7 of 20 (35%) of patients undergoing surgical ablation suffered a procedural complication, including two sternotomies for bleeding and one death. This was higher than for catheter ablation (P < 0.001). Surgical ablation took longer to perform (P < 0.001) and had a longer hospital admission (P < 0.001) than catheter ablation. Conclusion: Surgical AF ablation required significantly fewer repeat procedures than catheter ablation, and there was a clear trend towards improved arrhythmia outcome. However, it was associated with a significantly higher rate of procedural complications. Surgical ablation for paroxysmal AF is promising, however more prospective outcome data is required. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01504451, http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01504451.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sugihara et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: