Key result
Modified box isolation is linked to a ~10% reduction in left atrial dimension.
Why the study?
The effects of modified box isolation with posterior centerline on left atrial reverse remodeling and safety in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation were not fully established.
Observational (n=105)
No
Absolute Event Rate: 38% vs 42%
p-value: p=<0.0001
Box isolation may be safe with high PerAF success; supports reverse remodeling after extensive isolation but leaves open need for randomized trials.
; P < 0.0001) at 6 months post-ablation were significantly decreased in patients who maintained sinus rhythm compared to pre-ablation. In patients with recurrent AF/atrial tachycardia (AT), these parameters were also significantly decreased (P < 0.001, respectively).Box isolation with a posterior centerline has no esophageal complications and a high clinical success rate in patients with PerAF. Reverse remodeling could be achieved even when using extensive isolation of the PV and LAPW in patients with PerAF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miwa et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation (n=105). Modified box isolation with vertical centerline vs. Pre-ablation baseline was evaluated on Left atrial dimension at 6 months post-ablation in patients maintaining sinus rhythm (p=<0.0001). Modified box isolation with a vertical centerline for persistent atrial fibrillation significantly decreased left atrial dimension from 42 mm to 38 mm at 6 months post-ablation in patients who maintained sinus rhythm.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: