David C Kress1, Lynn Erickson1, Indrajit Choudhuri1, Jodi Zilinski1, Tadele Mengesha2, David Krum2, Jasbir Sra3. 1. Aurora Cardiovascular Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 2. Aurora Research Institute, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 3. Aurora Cardiovascular Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Electronic address: publishing1@aurora.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The outcomes of hybrid ablation versus endocardial catheter ablation alone were evaluated in patients with persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). BACKGROUND: Variable outcomes exist following endocardial catheter ablation in medically refractory patients with persistent AF. A hybrid epicardial-endocardial approach has emerged as an alternative to endocardial ablation. METHODS: In 133 consecutive patients, 69 received endocardial ablation alone (pulmonary vein isolation and radiofrequency catheter ablation [endo group]) and 64 received endocardial catheter ablation and epicardial ablation (hybrid group). Recurrence was defined as any arrhythmia following the 3-month blanking period. RESULTS: Patients were followed for a median of 16 months. The hybrid and endo groups were similar in age (61 ± 10 years vs. 62 ± 8 years), body mass index (35 ± 6 kg/m2 vs. 35 ± 7 kg/m2), CHA2D2-VASc score (2 ± 1 vs. 2 ± 1), and ejection fraction (54 ± 11% vs. 53 ± 8%). The hybrid group had longer AF duration (median [interquartile range (IQR)] (12 months [IQR: 8 to 28 months] vs. 7 months [IQR: 5 to 12 months]; p < 0.001) and more previous ablations (58% vs. 25%; p < 0.001). Both groups had similar antiarrhythmic drug use at follow-up (55% vs. 48%). The hybrid group was less likely to have recurrence (37% vs. 58%; p = 0.013) and repeat ablation (9% vs. 26%; p = 0.012), and had an AF-free survival of 72% versus 51% (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with persistent AF, hybrid ablation is associated with less AF recurrence and fewer re-do ablations. Prospective large-scale randomized trials are needed to validate these results.
OBJECTIVES: The outcomes of hybrid ablation versus endocardial catheter ablation alone were evaluated in patients with persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). BACKGROUND: Variable outcomes exist following endocardial catheter ablation in medically refractory patients with persistent AF. A hybrid epicardial-endocardial approach has emerged as an alternative to endocardial ablation. METHODS: In 133 consecutive patients, 69 received endocardial ablation alone (pulmonary vein isolation and radiofrequency catheter ablation [endo group]) and 64 received endocardial catheter ablation and epicardial ablation (hybrid group). Recurrence was defined as any arrhythmia following the 3-month blanking period. RESULTS:Patients were followed for a median of 16 months. The hybrid and endo groups were similar in age (61 ± 10 years vs. 62 ± 8 years), body mass index (35 ± 6 kg/m2 vs. 35 ± 7 kg/m2), CHA2D2-VASc score (2 ± 1 vs. 2 ± 1), and ejection fraction (54 ± 11% vs. 53 ± 8%). The hybrid group had longer AF duration (median [interquartile range (IQR)] (12 months [IQR: 8 to 28 months] vs. 7 months [IQR: 5 to 12 months]; p < 0.001) and more previous ablations (58% vs. 25%; p < 0.001). Both groups had similar antiarrhythmic drug use at follow-up (55% vs. 48%). The hybrid group was less likely to have recurrence (37% vs. 58%; p = 0.013) and repeat ablation (9% vs. 26%; p = 0.012), and had an AF-free survival of 72% versus 51% (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with persistent AF, hybrid ablation is associated with less AF recurrence and fewer re-do ablations. Prospective large-scale randomized trials are needed to validate these results.
Authors: Alfred J Albano; Jared Bush; Jessica L Parker; Kristin Corner; Hae W Lim; Michael P Brunner; Musa I Dahu; Sanjay Dandamudi; Darryl Elmouchi; Andre Gauri; Alan Woelfel; Nagib T Chalfoun Journal: J Atr Fibrillation Date: 2019-08-31
Authors: Giuseppe De Martino; Giuseppe Nasso; Alessio Gasperetti; Marco Moscarelli; Carmine Mancusi; Giuseppe Della Ratta; Claudia Calvanese; Gianfranco Mitacchione; Raffaele Bonifazi; Nicola Di Bari; Enrico Vassallo; Marco Schiavone; Mario Gaudino; Giovanni B Forleo; Giuseppe Speziale Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2021-03-08 Impact factor: 1.759
Authors: Aditya Eranki; Ashley R Wilson-Smith; Michael L Williams; Campbell D Flynn; Con Manganas Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2022-08-13 Impact factor: 1.522
Authors: Amer Harky; Christiana Bithas; Jeffrey Shi Kai Chan; Mostafa Snosi; Dimitrios Pousios; Andrew D Muir Journal: Braz J Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2020-06-01
Authors: G A Haywood; R Varini; P Osmancik; M Cireddu; J Caldwell; M A Chaudhry; M Loubani; P Della Bella; E Lapenna; P Budera; M Dalrymple-Hay Journal: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Date: 2020-01-06
Authors: Giuseppe Santarpino; Giuseppe Speziale; Giuseppe Nasso; Roberto Lorusso; Marco Moscarelli; Giuseppe De Martino; Angelo M Dell'Aquila; Arash Motekallemi; Nicola Di Bari; Ignazio Condello; Pasquale Mastroroberto Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2021-06-26 Impact factor: 1.637