INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is effective in the treatment of most patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Some advocate the addition of linear ablation techniques to improve efficacy; however, previous studies suggest recurrent PV conduction is responsible for AF recurrence. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of repeat PV isolation in patients with recurrent AF after an initial ablation procedure and to determine if any patient characteristics predict failure of repeat PV isolation procedures. METHODS AND RESULTS: Seventy-four patients with two or more AF ablation procedures using selective PV isolation were included. PV isolation was guided with multielectrode ring catheter recordings, electroanatomic mapping, and intracardiac electrocardiography. Radiofrequency energy was delivered using a 4-mm-tip catheter (maximum 40 W, 52 degrees C); cooled-tip ablation was performed in 10 patients. Linear ablation was not performed. Antiarrhythmic drugs were continued for at least 6 weeks after ablation; AF episodes during this period were censored. Reconnection of one or more segments of previously ablated PVs was observed in 97% of patients; reconnected PVs served as the trigger for AF in 77%. Repeat PV isolation resulted in AF control (cure or 90% reduction in AF episodes) in 64 patients (86%) over a follow-up period of 9.1 +/- 6.7 months. "High-risk" characteristics such as left atrial enlargement, persistent AF, or mitral regurgitation did not predict failure of repeat PV isolation procedures. CONCLUSION: Recurrent AF following selective PV isolation is overwhelmingly associated with PV electrical reconnection. Repeat PV isolation without linear ablation provides effective treatment for recurrent AF in patients in whom an initial PV isolation procedure failed, independent of clinical characteristics.
INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is effective in the treatment of most patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Some advocate the addition of linear ablation techniques to improve efficacy; however, previous studies suggest recurrent PV conduction is responsible for AF recurrence. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of repeat PV isolation in patients with recurrent AF after an initial ablation procedure and to determine if any patient characteristics predict failure of repeat PV isolation procedures. METHODS AND RESULTS: Seventy-four patients with two or more AF ablation procedures using selective PV isolation were included. PV isolation was guided with multielectrode ring catheter recordings, electroanatomic mapping, and intracardiac electrocardiography. Radiofrequency energy was delivered using a 4-mm-tip catheter (maximum 40 W, 52 degrees C); cooled-tip ablation was performed in 10 patients. Linear ablation was not performed. Antiarrhythmic drugs were continued for at least 6 weeks after ablation; AF episodes during this period were censored. Reconnection of one or more segments of previously ablated PVs was observed in 97% of patients; reconnected PVs served as the trigger for AF in 77%. Repeat PV isolation resulted in AF control (cure or 90% reduction in AF episodes) in 64 patients (86%) over a follow-up period of 9.1 +/- 6.7 months. "High-risk" characteristics such as left atrial enlargement, persistent AF, or mitral regurgitation did not predict failure of repeat PV isolation procedures. CONCLUSION: Recurrent AF following selective PV isolation is overwhelmingly associated with PV electrical reconnection. Repeat PV isolation without linear ablation provides effective treatment for recurrent AF in patients in whom an initial PV isolation procedure failed, independent of clinical characteristics.
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Gerhard Hindricks; Riccardo Cappato; Young-Hoon Kim; Eduardo B Saad; Luis Aguinaga; Joseph G Akar; Vinay Badhwar; Josep Brugada; John Camm; Peng-Sheng Chen; Shih-Ann Chen; Mina K Chung; Jens Cosedis Nielsen; Anne B Curtis; D Wyn Davies; John D Day; André d'Avila; N M S Natasja de Groot; Luigi Di Biase; Mattias Duytschaever; James R Edgerton; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; Patrick T Ellinor; Sabine Ernst; Guilherme Fenelon; Edward P Gerstenfeld; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Robert H Helm; Elaine Hylek; Warren M Jackman; Jose Jalife; Jonathan M Kalman; Josef Kautzner; Hans Kottkamp; Karl Heinz Kuck; Koichiro Kumagai; Richard Lee; Thorsten Lewalter; Bruce D Lindsay; Laurent Macle; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Gregory F Michaud; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Ken Okumura; Douglas Packer; Evgeny Pokushalov; Matthew R Reynolds; Prashanthan Sanders; Mauricio Scanavacca; Richard Schilling; Claudio Tondo; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; Atul Verma; David J Wilber; Teiichi Yamane Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 6.343