BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) forms the basis of catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation (AF). Ablation of additional sites has been used to increase the efficacy of ablation procedures in restoring and maintaining normal sinus rhythm. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper was to compare the effectiveness of PVI versus PVI plus adjuvant atrial ablations (PVI+) in patients with AF. METHODS: A systematic search using bibliographic databases and gray literature was undertaken. Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials evaluating clinical efficacy, effectiveness, or safety of ablation procedures in adults with AF were included in this review. RESULTS: Of 3,204 potential citations identified by the original search, 21 randomized controlled trials and three non-randomized trials were included. Meta-analysis results reveal that in the first year after ablation, AF patients who underwent PVI+ strategies had a significantly higher rate of maintaining sinus rhythm than those who underwent PVI alone (RR 1.10, 95 % CI 1.02, 1.17). However, a subgroup meta-analysis was statistically significant for only PVI+ left atrial (LA) linear ablations (RR 1.16, 95 % CI 1.04, 1.29). The pooled success rates were higher in PVI+ group for both paroxysmal (RR 1.14, 95 % CI 1.06, 1.24) and non-paroxysmal AF (RR 1.53, 95 % CI 1.10, 2.14). CONCLUSION: PVI+ strategies, particularly PVI+ LA ablations, appear to result in higher success rates than PVI alone in the first year after the procedure. Studies of longer duration are needed to evaluate the long-term benefits and safety of different adjunctive ablation approaches for rhythm control in AF patients.
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) forms the basis of catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation (AF). Ablation of additional sites has been used to increase the efficacy of ablation procedures in restoring and maintaining normal sinus rhythm. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper was to compare the effectiveness of PVI versus PVI plus adjuvant atrial ablations (PVI+) in patients with AF. METHODS: A systematic search using bibliographic databases and gray literature was undertaken. Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials evaluating clinical efficacy, effectiveness, or safety of ablation procedures in adults with AF were included in this review. RESULTS: Of 3,204 potential citations identified by the original search, 21 randomized controlled trials and three non-randomized trials were included. Meta-analysis results reveal that in the first year after ablation, AFpatients who underwent PVI+ strategies had a significantly higher rate of maintaining sinus rhythm than those who underwent PVI alone (RR 1.10, 95 % CI 1.02, 1.17). However, a subgroup meta-analysis was statistically significant for only PVI+ left atrial (LA) linear ablations (RR 1.16, 95 % CI 1.04, 1.29). The pooled success rates were higher in PVI+ group for both paroxysmal (RR 1.14, 95 % CI 1.06, 1.24) and non-paroxysmal AF (RR 1.53, 95 % CI 1.10, 2.14). CONCLUSION:PVI+ strategies, particularly PVI+ LA ablations, appear to result in higher success rates than PVI alone in the first year after the procedure. Studies of longer duration are needed to evaluate the long-term benefits and safety of different adjunctive ablation approaches for rhythm control in AFpatients.
Authors: Michel Haïssaguerre; Prashanthan Sanders; Mélèze Hocini; Yoshihide Takahashi; Martin Rotter; Frederic Sacher; Thomas Rostock; Li-Fern Hsu; Pierre Bordachar; Sylvain Reuter; Raymond Roudaut; Jacques Clémenty; Pierre Jaïs Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2005-11
Authors: Stephan Willems; Hanno Klemm; Thomas Rostock; Benedikt Brandstrup; Rodolfo Ventura; Daniel Steven; Tim Risius; Boris Lutomsky; Thomas Meinertz Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2006-06-16 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Anthony G Brooks; Martin K Stiles; Julien Laborderie; Dennis H Lau; Pawel Kuklik; Nicholas J Shipp; Li-Fern Hsu; Prashanthan Sanders Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2010-01-22 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: M Haïssaguerre; D C Shah; P Jaïs; M Hocini; T Yamane; I Deisenhofer; M Chauvin; S Garrigue; J Clémenty Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-11-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: J Pontoppidan; J C Nielsen; S H Poulsen; H K Jensen; H Walfridsson; A K Pedersen; P S Hansen Journal: Heart Date: 2009-03-03 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Thomas Arentz; Reinhold Weber; Gerd Bürkle; Claudia Herrera; Thomas Blum; Jochem Stockinger; Jan Minners; Franz Josef Neumann; Dietrich Kalusche Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-06-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: David Tamborero; Lluís Mont; Antonio Berruezo; Maria Matiello; Begoña Benito; Marta Sitges; Barbara Vidal; Teresa M de Caralt; Rosario J Perea; Radu Vatasescu; Josep Brugada Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2008-12-03
Authors: Andrew Cluckey; Alexander C Perino; Fahd N Yunus; George C Leef; Mariam Askari; Paul A Heidenreich; Sanjiv M Narayan; Paul J Wang; Mintu P Turakhia Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-01-08 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Allan Bohm; Lubos Urban; Lubomira Tothova; Ljuba Bacharova; Peter Musil; Jan Kyselovic; Peter Michalek; Tomas Uher; Branislav Bezak; Peter Olejnik; Robert Hatala Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2021-03-10 Impact factor: 1.900