Key result
Elimination of non-PV triggers after pulmonary vein isolation reduced the recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia compared with stepwise substrate modification (32.2% vs 43.8%; P=0.012).
Why the study?
Does elimination of non-PV triggers compared to stepwise substrate modification reduce recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation after PVI?
RCT (n=500)
Does elimination of non-PV triggers compared to stepwise substrate modification reduce recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation after PVI?
Absolute Event Rate: 32.2% vs 43.8%
p-value: p=0.012
Targeting non-pulmonary vein triggers after PVI significantly reduces long-term recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias compared to empirical substrate modification in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports non-PV trigger elimination after PVI in paroxysmal AF; extends RCT evidence favoring trigger-based over substrate ablation.
Lee et al. (2018) conducted an RCT in Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (n=500). Elimination of non-PV triggers vs. Stepwise substrate modification until noninducibility of atrial tachyarrhythmia was evaluated on Recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia after the single procedure (p=0.012). Elimination of non-PV triggers after pulmonary vein isolation reduced the recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia compared with stepwise substrate modification (32.2% vs 43.8%; P=0.012).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: