Key result
Higher LUCA score is linked to ~152% greater risk of post-ablation AF recurrence per point.
Its licence doesn't allow us to show a copy here.
Why the study?
Reliable predictors of recurrence after catheter ablation for AF remain limited, warranting a clinically applicable score to predict recurrence and procedural complexity.
Does the LUCA score predict atrial fibrillation recurrence at 12 months in patients undergoing catheter ablation?
Observational (n=679)
No
Does the LUCA score predict atrial fibrillation recurrence at 12 months in patients undergoing catheter ablation?
Hazard Ratio: 2.52 (95% CI 1.88–3.39)
p-value: p=<0.001
The novel LUCA score is a simple, validated clinical model that effectively predicts 1-year atrial fibrillation recurrence and procedural complexity following catheter ablation.
Score may aid recurrence risk stratification after AF ablation; leaves open external validation and outcome impact.
BACKGROUND: Reliable predictors of recurrence after Catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) remain limited. We aimed to develop and validate a clinically applicable score to predict AF recurrence and procedural complexity following CA. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, single-centre observational study enrolling 402 consecutive patients undergoing CA for AF. Clinical, echocardiographic, and procedural data were collected. The primary endpoint was AF recurrence at 12 months. Predictors were identified by Cox regression. A composite score (LUCA) was developed (0-3 points). Prognostic performance was assessed using Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis. An independent retrospective cohort (277 patients) served as validation cohort for external validation. RESULTS: Three predictors (LAVi, timing of ablation, AF at presentation) were independently associated with recurrence. The LUCA score stratified recurrence risk: one-year AF-free survival was 94.9% (score 0), 81.9% (1), 73.4% (2), and 30.0% (3) (log-rank p < 0.001). Each point increase corresponded to a 2.52-fold higher recurrence risk (HR 2.52, 95% CI 1.88-3.39, p < 0.001; C-index 0.69). Findings were consistent in external validation cohort (model C-index 0.776), where LUCA performed better compared to both APPLE (AUC 0.87 vs 0.77; ΔAUC 0.103, 95% CI 0.037-0.168, Z = 3.08, p = 0.002) and CHA2DS2-VASc (AUC 0.87 vs 0.56; ΔAUC 0.312, 95% CI 0.224-0.401, Z = 6.9, p < 0.001). Higher LUCA scores correlated with longer procedural time (ρ = 0.3, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The LUCA score predicts AF recurrence and procedural complexity after CA. It provides a practical and personalized tool to improve patient selection, guide procedural strategy, and optimize follow-up.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Segreti et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=679). LUCA score vs. Lower LUCA score was evaluated on Atrial fibrillation recurrence at 12 months (HR 2.52, 95% CI 1.88-3.39, p=<0.001). The LUCA score predicted atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation, with each 1-point increase associated with a higher risk of recurrence (HR 2.52; 95% CI 1.88-3.39; P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: