Key result
The 1-year efficacy of radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in a middle-volume center improved significantly from 53% in 2011-2014 to 82% in 2018-2019.
Why the study?
While experienced centers have reported improvements in PAF ablation safety and efficacy, data from real-life surveys and smaller EP laboratories have been less optimistic.
Does the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency and cryoballoon ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation improve over time in a middle-volume electrophysiology center?
Observational (n=234)
No
Does the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency and cryoballoon ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation improve over time in a middle-volume electrophysiology center?
Technological advancements and growing operator experience in a middle-volume center significantly improved the 1-year efficacy of radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, mirroring outcomes from high-volume centers.
Efficacy gains with experience support ablation programs in middle-volume centers; extends high-volume observations but remains hypothesis-generating.
INTRODUCTION: A significant improvement in safety and efficacy of ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) has been reported by experienced centers over recent years; however, data from real-life surveys and smaller electrophysiology (EP) laboratories have been less optimistic. AIM: To asses efficacy of ablation for PAF in a middle-volume EP center over last years. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 1 year efficacy and safety of ablation for PAF in three cohorts of patients treated between 2011 and 2014 (period I), 2015-2017 (period II), and 2018-2019 (period III). RESULTS: Of 234 patients (mean age 57 ± 9 years, 165 males), 81 (35%) were treated in period I, 84 (36%) in period II, and 69 (29%) in period III. The overall efficacy of ablation during all analyzed periods was 67%. The overall efficacy of ablation increased over time-from 56% in period I to 68% in period II and 81% in period III. Significant improvement was achieved using radiofrequency ablation (RF) (53% in period I vs 82% in period III, and 55% in period II vs 82% in period III, p = 0.003 and 0.0012, respectively) whereas positive trend in the improvement of cryoballoon efficacy was NS. The rate of peri-procedural complications was 9% and it did not change significantly over time. CONCLUSIONS: This real-life observational study from a medium volume EP center shows that progress in PAF ablation, especially RF, reported by highly-skilled centers, can be reproduced in real life by less experienced operators.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kułakowski et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (n=234). Radiofrequency ablation (Period III: 2018-2019) vs. Radiofrequency ablation (Period I: 2011-2014) was evaluated on 1-year efficacy of ablation (freedom from AF/AT recurrences) (p=0.003). The 1-year efficacy of radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in a middle-volume center improved significantly from 53% in 2011-2014 to 82% in 2018-2019.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: