Key result
Driver ablation boosts AF-free survival to ~92% vs. 79% with conventional ablation in obese patients.
Why the study?
The effectiveness of driver ablation for treating persistent atrial fibrillation in obese patients was uncertain.
Does driver ablation improve AF-free survival compared to conventional ablation in obese patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
RCT (n=186)
randomly assigned
Does driver ablation improve AF-free survival compared to conventional ablation in obese patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Event Rate: 91.91% vs 79%
p-value: p=0.026
In obese patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, driver ablation significantly improves long-term arrhythmia-free survival compared to conventional ablation.
Driver ablation for persistent AF in obese patients remains hypothesis-generating; larger trials needed to assess benefit over conventional ablation.
AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine whether driver ablation effectively treats persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) in obese patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomly assigned 124 persistent AF obese patients to two groups, one undergoing conventional ablation (n = 62) and the other undergoing driver ablation (n = 62). Sixty-two non-obese patients with persistent AF undergoing driver ablation served as matched controls. Bipolar electrogram dispersion was analysed for driver mapping. Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) volume was measured using cardiac computed tomography. Obese patients had a higher proportion of driver regions in the posterior wall (56.5% vs. 32.3%, P = 0.007). Driver complexity, measured as the average number and area of driver regions, was higher in the obese group than in the non-obese group (3.5 ± 1.0 vs. 2.9 ± 0.9, P < 0.001; 15.5% ± 4.2% vs. 9.8 ± 2.6%, P < 0.001, respectively). Left atrial EAT volume correlated better with the proportion of area of driver regions than did body mass index (BMI) and total EAT (BMI: r2 = 0.250, P < 0.001; total EAT: r2 = 0.379, P < 0.001; and left atrial EAT: r2 = 0.439, P < 0.001). The rate of AF termination was significantly higher in the driver ablation group than in the conventional ablation group (82.9% vs. 22.8%, P < 0.001). During the follow-up period of 16.9 ± 6.5 months, patients in the driver ablation group had significantly better AF-free survival (91.91% vs. 79.0%, log rank test, P = 0.026) and AF/atrial tachycardia-free survival (83.9% vs. 64.5%, log rank test, P = 0.011) than did patients in the conventional ablation group. CONCLUSION: Obesity is associated with increased driver complexity. Driver ablation improves long-term outcomes in obese patients with persistent AF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiang et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Persistent atrial fibrillation in obese patients (n=186). Driver ablation vs. Conventional ablation was evaluated on AF-free survival (p=0.026). Driver ablation significantly improved AF-free survival compared to conventional ablation in obese patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (91.91% vs. 79.0%, P=0.026).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: