PURPOSE: Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) is an effective technique for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). To date, there are no risk models to predict very late recurrence of atrial fibrillation (VLRAF) after CBA. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a single-center database was performed. Inclusion criteria included PVI using CBA for atrial fibrillation (AF) without additional ablation targets, follow-up > 365 days, and no recurrent AF between 90 and 365 days after procedure. The primary endpoint was recurrent AF > 30 s > 12 months post-CBA. A risk model was created using clinical variables. RESULTS: Of 674 CBA performed from 2011 to 2016, 300 patients (200 male, 62.0 ± 9.9 years) met inclusion criteria. Of these, 159 (53.0%) patients had paroxysmal AF. Patients had an average of 9.5 ± 2.7 cryoballoon freezes, and no patients required additional radiofrequency ablation lesion sets. Over a follow-up of 995 ± 490 days, 77/300 (25.7%) patients exhibited VLRAF. Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated that Structural heart disease (1 point), Coronary artery disease (3 points), left Atrial diameter > 43 mm (1 point), Left bundle branch block (3 points), Early return of AF (4 points), and non-paroxysmal AF (3 points) were risk factors for VLRAF. Combining these variables into a risk model, SCALE-CryoAF, (min 0; max 15) predicted VLRAF with an area under the curve of 0.73. CONCLUSION: SCALE-CryoAF is the first risk model to specifically predict first recurrence of AF beyond 1 year, VLRAF, after CBA. Model discrimination demonstrates that SCALE-CryoAF predicts VLRAF after CBA significantly better than other risk models for AF recurrence.
PURPOSE: Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) is an effective technique for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). To date, there are no risk models to predict very late recurrence of atrial fibrillation (VLRAF) after CBA. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a single-center database was performed. Inclusion criteria included PVI using CBA for atrial fibrillation (AF) without additional ablation targets, follow-up > 365 days, and no recurrent AF between 90 and 365 days after procedure. The primary endpoint was recurrent AF > 30 s > 12 months post-CBA. A risk model was created using clinical variables. RESULTS: Of 674 CBA performed from 2011 to 2016, 300 patients (200 male, 62.0 ± 9.9 years) met inclusion criteria. Of these, 159 (53.0%) patients had paroxysmal AF. Patients had an average of 9.5 ± 2.7 cryoballoon freezes, and no patients required additional radiofrequency ablation lesion sets. Over a follow-up of 995 ± 490 days, 77/300 (25.7%) patients exhibited VLRAF. Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated that Structural heart disease (1 point), Coronary artery disease (3 points), left Atrial diameter > 43 mm (1 point), Left bundle branch block (3 points), Early return of AF (4 points), and non-paroxysmal AF (3 points) were risk factors for VLRAF. Combining these variables into a risk model, SCALE-CryoAF, (min 0; max 15) predicted VLRAF with an area under the curve of 0.73. CONCLUSION: SCALE-CryoAF is the first risk model to specifically predict first recurrence of AF beyond 1 year, VLRAF, after CBA. Model discrimination demonstrates that SCALE-CryoAF predicts VLRAF after CBA significantly better than other risk models for AF recurrence.
Entities:
Keywords:
Atrial fibrillation; Cryoballoon ablation; Risk score; Very late return of atrial fibrillation
Authors: Craig T January; L Samuel Wann; Joseph S Alpert; Hugh Calkins; Joaquin E Cigarroa; Joseph C Cleveland; Jamie B Conti; Patrick T Ellinor; Michael D Ezekowitz; Michael E Field; Katherine T Murray; Ralph L Sacco; William G Stevenson; Patrick J Tchou; Cynthia M Tracy; Clyde W Yancy Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: James W McCready; Tom Smedley; Pier D Lambiase; Syed Y Ahsan; Oliver R Segal; Edward Rowland; Martin D Lowe; Anthony W Chow Journal: Europace Date: 2010-12-08 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Victoria Jacobs; Heidi T May; Tami L Bair; Brian G Crandall; Michael Cutler; John D Day; J Peter Weiss; Jeffrey S Osborn; Joseph B Muhlestein; Jeffrey L Anderson; Charles Mallender; T Jared Bunch Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2014-12-26 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Maciej Wójcik; Alexander Berkowitsch; Sergey Zaltsberg; Christian W Hamm; Heinz F Pitschner; Malte Kuniss; Thomas Neumann Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2014-02-05 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: Uğur Canpolat; Kudret Aytemir; Hikmet Yorgun; Levent Şahiner; Ergün Barış Kaya; Ali Oto Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2013-09-07 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Maciej Wójcik; Alexander Berkowitsch; Harald Greiss; Sergey Zaltsberg; Dimitri Pajitnev; Nicolas Deubner; Christian W Hamm; Heinz F Pitschner; Malte Kuniss; Thomas Neumann Journal: Circ J Date: 2013-06-12 Impact factor: 2.993
Authors: Jürgen Vogt; Johannes Heintze; Klaus J Gutleben; Bogdan Muntean; Dieter Horstkotte; Georg Nölker Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-11-28 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Marek Jastrzębski; Grzegorz Kiełbasa; Kamil Fijorek; Adam Bednarski; Aleksander Kusiak; Tomasz Sondej; Agnieszka Bednarek; Wiktoria Wojciechowska; Marek Rajzer Journal: J Arrhythm Date: 2021-05-20
Authors: Graham Peigh; Jeremiah Wasserlauf; Kelly Vogel; Rachel M Kaplan; Anna Pfenniger; Daniel Marks; Arjun Mehta; Alexandru B Chicos; Rishi Arora; Susan Kim; Albert Lin; Nishant Verma; Kaustubha D Patil; Bradley P Knight; Rod S Passman Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2021-07-05 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Graham Peigh; Jeremiah Wasserlauf; Rachel M Kaplan; Ansel P Amaral; Amar Trivedi; Alexandru B Chicos; Rishi Arora; Susan Kim; Albert Lin; Nishant Verma; Bradley P Knight; Rod S Passman Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2020-03-09 Impact factor: 2.942