Key result
Radiofrequency catheter ablation improved right ventricular systolic function significantly more in patients with persistent AF (ΔRVFWSL 9.0%) than in paroxysmal (0.9%) or long-standing AF (1.0%).
Why the study?
The effects of radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation on right ventricular function are not well known.
Does radiofrequency catheter ablation improve right ventricular function differently among patients with paroxysmal, persistent, and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=164)
Does radiofrequency catheter ablation improve right ventricular function differently among patients with paroxysmal, persistent, and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation?
Effect estimate: ΔRVFWSL 9.0% in PeAF vs 0.9% in PAF and 1.0% in LSPeAF
Absolute Event Rate: 9% vs 0.9%
p-value: p=<0.001
Radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation leads to greater improvements in right ventricular systolic function in patients with persistent AF compared to those with paroxysmal or long-standing persistent AF.
May support subtype-specific RV recovery after RFCA; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before clinical adoption.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The effects of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) on right ventricular (RV) function are not well known. METHODS: Patients who underwent RFCA for AF and underwent pre- and post-procedural echocardiography were enrolled consecutively. Fractional area change (FAC), RV free-wall longitudinal strain (RVFWSL), and RV 4-chamber strain including the ventricular septum (RV4CSL) were measured. Changes in FAC, RVFWSL, and RV4CSL before and after RFCA were compared among paroxysmal AF (PAF), persistent AF (PeAF), and long-standing persistent AF (LSPeAF) groups. RESULTS: A total of 164 participants (74 PAF, 47 PeAF, and 43 LSPeAF; age, 60.8 ± 9.8 years; men, 74.4%) was enrolled. The patients with PeAF and LSPeAF had worse RV4CSL (p<0.001) and RVFWSL (p<0.001) than those with PAF and reference values. Improvements in RVFWSL and RV4CSL after RFCA were significant in the PeAF group compared with the PAF and LSPeAF groups (ΔRV4CSL, 8.4% [5.1, 11.6] in PeAF vs. 1.0% [-1.0, 4.1] in PAF, 1.9% [-0.2, 4.4] in LSPeAF, p<0.001; ΔRVFWSL, 9.0% [6.9, 11.5] in PeAF vs. 0.9% [-1.4, 4.9] in PAF, 1.0% [-1.0, 3.6] in LSPeAF, p<0.001). In patients without recurrence, improvements in RVFWSL and RV4CSL after RFCA were significant in the PeAF group compared to the LSPeAF group. CONCLUSIONS: RV systolic function is more impaired in patients with PeAF and LSPeAF than in those with PAF. RV systolic function is more improved after RFCA in patients with PeAF than in those with PAF or LSPeAF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (AF) (n=164). Radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) vs. Paroxysmal AF (PAF) and Long-standing persistent AF (LSPeAF) was evaluated on Change in right ventricular free-wall longitudinal strain (ΔRVFWSL) (ΔRVFWSL 9.0% in PeAF vs 0.9% in PAF and 1.0% in LSPeAF, p=<0.001). Radiofrequency catheter ablation improved right ventricular systolic function significantly more in patients with persistent AF (ΔRVFWSL 9.0%) than in paroxysmal (0.9%) or long-standing AF (1.0%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: