Simon Kochhäuser1, Atul Verma2, Rupin Dalvi3, Adrian Suszko3, Pouria Alipour2, Prashanthan Sanders4, Jean Champagne5, Laurent Macle6, Girish M Nair7, Hugh Calkins8, David J Wilber9, Vijay S Chauhan10. 1. Southlake Regional Health Centre, Newmarket, Ontario, Canada; Division of Electrophysiology, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany. 2. Southlake Regional Health Centre, Newmarket, Ontario, Canada. 3. Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 4. University of Adelaide and Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 5. Institut de Cardiologie et Pneumologie de l'Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada. 6. Montreal Heart Institute, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 7. University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 8. Johns Hopkins University Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland. 9. Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois. 10. Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: vijay.chauhan@uhn.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the spatial relationships of focal electrical sources (FSs) to complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE) and continuous electrical activity (CEA). BACKGROUND: Fractionated atrial electrograms have been associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) drivers in computational studies and represent ablation targets in the management of persistent AF. METHODS: We included a subset of 66 patients (age: 63 [56, 67] years, 69% persistent AF) with electroanatomic data from the SELECT AF (Selective complex fractionated atrial electrograms targeting for atrial fibrillation) randomized control trial that compared the efficacy of CFAE with CEA ablation in AF patients undergoing pulmonary vein antral ablation. Focal sources were identified based on bipolar electrogram periodicity and QS unipolar electrogram morphology. RESULTS:A total of 77 FSs (median: 1 [1st quartile, 3rd quartile: 1, 2] per patient) were identified most commonly in the pulmonary vein antrum and left atrial appendage. The proportions of FSs inside CFAE and CEA regions were similar (13% vs. 1.3%, respectively; p = 0.13). Focal sources were more likely to be on the border zone of CFAEs than in CEAs (49% vs. 7.8%, respectively; p = 0.012). Following ablation, 53% of patients had ≥1 unablated extrapulmonary vein FS. The median number of unablated FS was higher in patients with AF recurrence post ablation than in patients without (median: 1 [0, 1] vs. 0 [0, 1], respectively; p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: One-half of the FSs detected during AF localized to the border of CFAE areas, whereas most of the FSs were found outside CEA areas. CFAE or CEA ablation leaves a number of FS unablated, which is associated with AF recurrence. These findings suggest that many CFAEs may arise from passive wave propagation, remote from FS, which may limit their therapeutic efficacy in AF substrate modification.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the spatial relationships of focal electrical sources (FSs) to complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE) and continuous electrical activity (CEA). BACKGROUND: Fractionated atrial electrograms have been associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) drivers in computational studies and represent ablation targets in the management of persistent AF. METHODS: We included a subset of 66 patients (age: 63 [56, 67] years, 69% persistent AF) with electroanatomic data from the SELECT AF (Selective complex fractionated atrial electrograms targeting for atrial fibrillation) randomized control trial that compared the efficacy of CFAE with CEA ablation in AFpatients undergoing pulmonary vein antral ablation. Focal sources were identified based on bipolar electrogram periodicity and QS unipolar electrogram morphology. RESULTS: A total of 77 FSs (median: 1 [1st quartile, 3rd quartile: 1, 2] per patient) were identified most commonly in the pulmonary vein antrum and left atrial appendage. The proportions of FSs inside CFAE and CEA regions were similar (13% vs. 1.3%, respectively; p = 0.13). Focal sources were more likely to be on the border zone of CFAEs than in CEAs (49% vs. 7.8%, respectively; p = 0.012). Following ablation, 53% of patients had ≥1 unablated extrapulmonary vein FS. The median number of unablated FS was higher in patients with AF recurrence post ablation than in patients without (median: 1 [0, 1] vs. 0 [0, 1], respectively; p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: One-half of the FSs detected during AF localized to the border of CFAE areas, whereas most of the FSs were found outside CEA areas. CFAE or CEA ablation leaves a number of FS unablated, which is associated with AF recurrence. These findings suggest that many CFAEs may arise from passive wave propagation, remote from FS, which may limit their therapeutic efficacy in AF substrate modification.