Key result
EXPORT trial tests non-PV trigger ablation alongside PVI in 430 persistent AF patients.
Its licence doesn't allow us to show a copy here.
Why the study?
The efficacy of pulmonary vein isolation alone is less pronounced in persistent AF, and whether adjunctive non-PV trigger ablation improves long-term outcomes is unknown.
Does systematic non-PV trigger ablation in addition to PV isolation prevent atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence in participants with persistent AF?
RCT (n=430)
single-blinded, blinded-endpoint
randomly assigned
Yes
Does systematic non-PV trigger ablation in addition to PV isolation prevent atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence in participants with persistent AF?
The EXPORT trial will determine if adjunctive non-pulmonary vein trigger ablation improves freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence compared to pulmonary vein isolation alone in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.
Ablation of non-PV triggers may lower recurrence in persistent AF; leaves open whether routine targeting improves outcomes in randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) is strongly endorsed with a class IA recommendation for those with symptomatic AF who are refractory to antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy to reduce symptoms, recurrence, and disease progression. However, in persistent AF, the efficacy of PV isolation alone is less pronounced than in paroxysmal AF, underscoring the necessity of adjunctive ablation strategies. Whether ablation of non-PV triggers after PV isolation improves the long-term procedure outcome is unknown. The EXPORT trial aims to evaluate the effects of systematic non-PV trigger ablation over PV isolation alone on freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence among participants with persistent AF. STUDY DESIGN: The EXPORT trial is a multicenter, prospective, superiority, single-blinded, blinded-endpoint, clinical trial. Participants with persistent AF refractory to AAD therapy undergoing first-time AF ablation will be randomly assigned to either PV isolation with non-PV trigger provocation, mapping, and ablation or PV isolation alone. The primary endpoint is any documented atrial arrhythmia lasting ≥30 s after a 3-month blanking period following ablation with or without the use of AADs. Key secondary endpoints are freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence without AAD use, periprocedural complications, and total procedure time. The estimated total sample size is 430 participants, with 215 participants in each group. CONCLUSION: The EXPORT trial will assess the effect of non-PV trigger mapping and ablation with PV isolation on freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence in participants with persistent AF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov; NCT07197931.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in persistent atrial fibrillation (n=430). PV isolation with non-PV trigger provocation, mapping, and ablation vs. PV isolation alone was evaluated on any documented atrial arrhythmia lasting ≥30 s after a 3-month blanking period following ablation with or without the use of AADs. The EXPORT trial is an ongoing randomized trial designed to enroll 430 participants to evaluate whether non-pulmonary vein trigger ablation improves outcomes in persistent atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: