Dataset Information

Is there a difference in rhythm outcome between patients undergoing first line versus second line paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation?

ABSTRACT:

Background

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is an established second line therapy for patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF (PAF) and may be considered as a first line therapy in selected patients who are highly symptomatic, considering patient choice, benefit, and risk, according to recent guidelines. Our study investigated whether a first line vs. second line ablation approach may result in improved sinus rhythm maintenance after ablation.

Methods

A total of 153 patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation for PAF were included in the study (age 55±12 years, 29% female). Seventy-nine patients underwent first line AF ablation and 74 patients underwent second line AF ablation after failed antiarrhythmic drug therapy. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics such as age, history of AF, left atrial size or LVEF between groups. Success was defined as atrial tachyarrhythmia free survival during a 12-month follow-up by means of serial ECG Holter monitoring.

Results

There was no significant difference in cumulative arrhythmia-free survival between those patients who received AF ablation as a first or second line therapy. Single procedure success was 78% in the first line group vs. 81% in the second line group; multiple procedure success was 90 vs. 91%, (n.s.). Complication rate was 1.3% vs. 1.4% (n.s.).

Conclusion

Success of AF ablation did not differ between patients who receive ablation as first vs. second line therapy. Based on these data, a trial of AAD therapy before AF ablation may be justified in most patients with symptomatic PAF eligible for rhythm control.

SUBMITTER: Manninger M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6285381 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is there a difference in rhythm outcome between patients undergoing first line versus second line paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation?

Manninger Martin M Ebner Jakob J Zweiker David D Sieghartsleitner Raphael R Mastnak Bernadette B Bisping Egbert E Lercher Peter P Riedlbauer Rita R Rotman Brigitte B Brussee Helmut H Scherr Daniel D

PloS one 20181207 12

<h4>Background</h4>Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is an established second line therapy for patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF (PAF) and may be considered as a first line therapy in selected patients who are highly symptomatic, considering patient choice, benefit, and risk, according to recent guidelines. Our study investigated whether a first line vs. second line ablation approach may result in improved sinus rhythm maintenance after ablation.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 153 p ...[more]

PMID: 30532216

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Ablation is a widely used therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF); however, arrhythmia recurrence and repeat procedures are common. Studies examining surrogate markers of genetic susceptibility to AF, such as family history and individual AF susceptibility alleles, suggest these may be associated with recurrence outcomes. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to test the association between AF genetic susceptibility and recurrence after ablation using a comprehensive polygenic risk score for AF. METHODS:Ten centers from the AF Genetics Consortium identified patients who had undergone de novo AF ablation. AF genetic susceptibility was measured using a previously described polygenic risk score (N=929 single-nucleotide polymorphisms) and tested for an association with clinical characteristics and time-to-recurrence with a 3 month blanking period. Recurrence was defined as >30 seconds of AF, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia. Multivariable analysis adjusted for age, sex, height, body mass index, persistent AF, hypertension, coronary disease, left atrial size, left ventricular ejection fraction, and year of ablation. RESULTS:Four thousand two hundred seventy-six patients were eligible for analysis of baseline characteristics and 3259 for recurrence outcomes. The overall arrhythmia recurrence rate between 3 and 12 months was 44% (1443/3259). Patients with higher AF genetic susceptibility were younger (P<0.001) and had fewer clinical risk factors for AF (P=0.001). Persistent AF (hazard ratio [HR], 1.39 [95% CI, 1.22-1.58]; P<0.001), left atrial size (per cm: HR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.19-1.46]; P<0.001), and left ventricular ejection fraction (per 10%: HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.80-0.97]; P=0.008) were associated with increased risk of recurrence. In univariate analysis, higher AF genetic susceptibility trended towards a higher risk of recurrence (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.99-1.18]; P=0.07), which became less significant in multivariable analysis (HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.98-1.15]; P=0.13). CONCLUSIONS:Higher AF genetic susceptibility was associated with younger age and fewer clinical risk factors but not recurrence. Arrhythmia recurrence after AF ablation may represent a genetically different phenotype compared to AF susceptibility.

Project description:Left atrial enlargement and persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) are well-known predictors for arrhythmia recurrence after AF catheter ablation (LRAF). In this study, by using pathway enrichment analysis of GWAS data, we tested the hypothesis that genetic pathways associated with these phenotypes are also associated with LRAF.Samples from 660 patients with paroxysmal (n = 370) or persistent AF (n = 290) undergoing de-novo AF catheter ablation were genotyped for ~1,000,000 SNPs. SNPs found to be significantly associated with left atrial diameter (LAD) or AF type were used for gene-based association tests in a systematic biological Knowledge-based mining system for Genome-wide Genetic studies (KGG). Associated genes were tested for pathway enrichment using WEB-based Gene SeT AnaLysis Toolkit (WebGestalt), the Gene Annotation Tool to Help Explain Relationships (GATHER) and the databases provided by Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG). In a second step, the association of consistently enriched pathways and LRAF was tested.By using sequential 7-day Holter ECGs, LRAF between 3 and 12 months was observed in 48% and was associated with LAD (B = 1.801, 95% CI 0.760-2.841, p = 1.0E-3) and persistent AF (OR = 2.1; 95% CI 1.567-2.931, p = 2.0E-6). WebGestalt (adj. p = 2.7E-22) and GATHER (adj. p = 5.2E-3) identified the calcium signaling pathway (hsa04020) as the only consistently enriched pathway for LAD, while the extracellular matrix (ECM) -receptor interaction pathway (hsa04512) was the only consistently enriched pathway for AF type (adj. p = 2.1E-15 in WebGestalt; adj. p = 9.3E-4 in GATHER). Both calcium signaling (adj. p = 2.2E-17 in WebGestalt; adj. p = 2.9E-2 in GATHER) and ECM-receptor interaction (adj. p = 1.2E-10 in WebGestalt; adj. p = 2.9E-2 in GATHER) were significantly associated with LRAF.Calcium signaling and ECM-receptor interaction pathways are associated with LAD and AF type and, in turn, with LRAF. Future and larger studies are necessary to replicate and apply these findings.

Project description:BackgroundThe optimal rhythm management strategy for people with non-paroxysmal (persistent or long-standing persistent) atrial fibrilation is currently not well defined. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been the mainstay of therapy. But recently, in people who have not responded to antiarrhythmic drugs, the use of ablation (catheter and surgical) has emerged as an alternative to maintain sinus rhythm to avoid long-term atrial fibrillation complications. However, evidence from randomised trials about the efficacy and safety of ablation in non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation is limited.ObjectivesTo determine the efficacy and safety of ablation (catheter and surgical) in people with non-paroxysmal (persistent or long-standing persistent) atrial fibrillation compared to antiarrhythmic drugs.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, conference abstracts, clinical trial registries, and Health Technology Assessment Database. We searched these databases from their inception to 1 April 2016. We used no language restrictions.Selection criteriaWe included randomised trials evaluating the effect of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) or surgical ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drugs in adults with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, regardless of any concomitant underlying heart disease, with at least 12 months of follow-up.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We evaluated risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) a using fixed-effect model when heterogeneity was low (I² <= 40%) and a random-effects model when heterogeneity was moderate or substantial (I² > 40%). Using the GRADE approach, we evaluated the quality of the evidence and used the GRADE profiler (GRADEpro) to import data from Review Manager 5 to create 'Summary of findings' tables.Main resultsWe included three randomised trials with 261 participants (mean age: 60 years) comparing RFCA (159 participants) to antiarrhythmic drugs (102) for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. We generally assessed the included studies as having low or unclear risk of bias across multiple domains, with reported outcomes generally lacking precision due to low event rates. Evidence showed that RFCA was superior to antiarrhythmic drugs in achieving freedom from atrial arrhythmias (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.88; 3 studies, 261 participants; low-quality evidence), reducing the need for cardioversion (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.82; 3 studies, 261 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and reducing cardiac-related hospitalisation (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.72; 2 studies, 216 participants; low-quality evidence) at 12 months follow-up. There was substantial uncertainty surrounding the effect of RFCA regarding significant bradycardia (or need for a pacemaker) (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.63; 3 studies, 261 participants; low-quality evidence), periprocedural complications, and other safety outcomes (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.16 to 5.68; 3 studies, 261 participants; very low-quality evidence).Authors' conclusionsIn people with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, evidence suggests a superiority of RFCA to antiarrhythmic drugs in achieving freedom from atrial arrhythmias, reducing the need for cardioversion, and reducing cardiac-related hospitalisations. There was uncertainty surrounding the effect of RFCA with significant bradycardia (or need for a pacemaker), periprocedural complications, and other safety outcomes. Evidence should be interpreted with caution, as event rates were low and quality of evidence ranged from moderate to very low.

Dataset Information

Is there a difference in rhythm outcome between patients undergoing first line versus second line paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation?

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Is there a difference in rhythm outcome between patients undergoing first line versus second line paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure