Why the study?
Does targeting extrapulmonary mechanisms in combination with or instead of pulmonary vein isolation improve long-term procedural success rates in atrial fibrillation ablation?
Does targeting extrapulmonary mechanisms in combination with or instead of pulmonary vein isolation improve long-term procedural success rates in atrial fibrillation ablation?
The lack of durable pulmonary vein isolation despite clinical success in AF ablation suggests that extrapulmonary targets may be important for long-term outcomes.
Extrapulmonary targets merit evaluation in AF ablation trials; leaves open whether they improve long-term success beyond PVI.
Radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) has become a frequently used therapy after failure of at least one antiarrhythmic drug. The cornerstone of AF ablation has been durable pulmonary vein isolation. However, understanding the positive and negative outcomes of catheter ablation of AF is severely limited by diverse ablation methodologies that do not seem to result in durable pulmonary vein isolation. Without durable pulmonary isolation ablation, it is unclear if ablation strategies need to be modified to include extrapulmonary vein ablation targets in combination with pulmonary vein isolation or alone to improve long-term procedural success rates. The marked discrepancy between AF ablation procedure success rates and actual long-term pulmonary vein isolation rates does suggest that targeting other mechanisms can be considered to achieve similar or better results when compared to pulmonary vein isolation alone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bunch et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: