| Literature DB >> 34674646 |
Jing Zheng1, Deling Zu1, Keyun Cheng1, Yunlong Xia2, Yingxue Dong3, Zhenyan Gao4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is an established therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF), but recurrence after ablation remains a great challenge. Additionally, little is known about the effect of renal function on the efficiency of AF ablation. This study aimed to evaluate the predictors of the prognosis of catheter ablation for AF, especially the effect of renal function.Entities:
Keywords: Atrial fibrillation; Catheter ablation; Estimated glomerular filtration rate; Mild to moderate renal insufficiency; Recurrence
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34674646 PMCID: PMC8529753 DOI: 10.1186/s12872-021-02320-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord ISSN: 1471-2261 Impact factor: 2.298
Fig. 1Flowchart of the study. AF indicates atrial fibrillation
Baseline characteristics between recurrence and non-recurrence groups
| Recurrence | Non-recurrence | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 57.0 ± 10.9 | 56.6 ± 10.1 | 0.464 |
| Female, n (%) | 31 (29.8) | 49 (24.3) | 0.295 |
| History of AF, years | 3.0 ± 1.5 | 2.6 ± 2.3 | 0.848 |
| Persistent AF, n (%) | 48 (46.2) | 72 (35.6) | 0.065 |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 46 (44.2) | 83 (41.1) | 0.598 |
| Diabetes mellitus, n (%) | 6 (5.8) | 23 (11.4) | 0.112 |
| Coronary heart disease, n (%) | 9 (8.7) | 22(10.9) | 0.539 |
| Ischaemic stroke, n (%) | 8 (7.7) | 12(5.9) | 0.557 |
| CHADS2 score | 0.8 ± 1.0 | 0.8 ± 0.9 | 0.946 |
| CHA2DS2-VASc score | 1.3 ± 1.2 | 1.2 ± 1.2 | 0.599 |
| R2CHADS2 score | 1.6 ± 1.4 | 1.4 ± 1.3 | 0.082 |
| Produce time, h | 2.5 ± 1.5 | 2.3 ± 1.3 | 0.265 |
| Exposure time, s | 61.6 ± 29.3 | 63.3 ± 27.9 | 0.176 |
| Ablation time, min | 53.8 ± 17.4 | 55.6 ± 19.9 | 0.198 |
| LAD, mm | 41.6 ± 5.0 | 39.39 ± 3.4 | < 0.001 |
| LAV, ml | 58.6 ± 17.7 | 50.5 ± 11.6 | < 0.001 |
| LAVI, ml/m2 | 33.7 ± 9.7 | 27.1 ± 6.5 | < 0.001 |
| LVEF, % | 57.2 ± 5.7 | 59.9 ± 4.8 | 0.108 |
| eGFR, ml/min/1.732 | 53.5 ± 14.4 | 65.5 ± 13.3 | < 0.001 |
| CCr, ml/min | 85.2 ± 26.1 | 101.5 ± 29.4 | 0.033 |
Multivariate logistic regression analysis of predictors for recurrence after AF ablation
| Variable | B | Sig | 95%CI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.45 | 0.361 | 0.950–1.152 |
| Female | − 0.815 | 0.314 | 0.936–1.169 |
| History of AF | − 0.700 | 0.065 | 0.236–1.045 |
| Persistent AF | − 0.841 | 0.218 | 0.113–1.645 |
| Hypertension | − 0.997 | 0.528 | 0.017–8.145 |
| Diabetes mellitus | − 1.962 | 0.292 | 0.224–5.401 |
| Coronary heart disease | − 2.026 | 0.281 | 0.003–5.265 |
| Ischaemic stroke | − 0.277 | 0.558 | 0.300–1.916 |
| LAD | − 0.360 | 0.034 | 0.504–0.967 |
| LAV | − 0.719 | 0.598 | 0.545–1.418 |
| LAVI | − 0.819 | 0.000 | 0.322–0.602 |
| eGFR | − 0.354 | 0.002 | 0.559–0.881 |
| CCr | − 0.007 | 0.637 | 0.966–1.021 |
Fig. 2The ROC curve analysis of the eGFR (yellow line) and LAVI (blue line) according to recurrence of AF after a single ablation procedure. Arrows indicate optimal cut-off point for sensitivity and specificity
Fig. 3Long-term AF recurrence after a single catheter ablation: A the long-term recurrence in patients with or without eGFR ≤ 55 ml/min/1.732. B The long-term recurrence in patients with or without LAVI ≥ 30 ml/m2
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression with backward elimination of clinical variables for predicting recurrence after AF ablation
| Hazard ratio | Lower 95% CI | Upper 95% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 1.004 | 0.983 | 1.026 | 0.718 |
| Gender | ||||
| Male (ref.) | ||||
| Female | 1.258 | 0.821 | 1.926 | 0.291 |
| Persistent AF | ||||
| No (ref.) | ||||
| Yes | 1.437 | 0.976 | 2.115 | 0.066 |
| History of AF | 1.235 | 1.026 | 1.486 | 0.025 |
| Hypertension | ||||
| No (ref.) | ||||
| Yes | 0.924 | 0.625 | 1.367 | 0.693 |
| Diabetes | ||||
| No (ref.) | ||||
| Yes | 0.572 | 0.248 | 1.317 | 0.189 |
| Coronary heart disease | ||||
| No (ref.) | ||||
| Yes | 0.778 | 0.389 | 1.554 | 0.477 |
| Ischaemic stroke | ||||
| No (ref.) | ||||
| Yes | 1.336 | 0.648 | 2.756 | 0.433 |
| CCr, ml/min | 0.935 | 0.920 | 0.951 | < 0.001 |
| eGFR, ml/min/1.732 | 0.955 | 0.941 | 0.970 | < 0.001 |
| CHADS2 score | 0.917 | 0.738 | 1.140 | 0.437 |
| CHA2DS2-VASc score | 0.997 | 0.846 | 1.177 | 0.976 |
| R2CHADS2 score | 0.996 | 0.959 | 1.035 | 0.849 |
| Produce time, h | 2.350 | 1.542 | 3.582 | < 0.001 |
| Exposure time, s | 0.997 | 0.981 | 1.013 | 0.706 |
| Ablation time, min | 0.995 | 0.976 | 1.014 | 0.586 |
| LAD, mm | 1.319 | 1.209 | 1.439 | < 0.001 |
| LAV, ml | 1.327 | 1.257 | 1.401 | < 0.001 |
| LAVI, ml/m2 | 1.323 | 1.251 | 1.400 | < 0.001 |
| LVEF, % | 0.950 | 0.921 | 0.981 | 0.002 |
| eGFR, ml/min/1.732 | 0.930 | 0.912 | 0.947 | < 0.001 |
| LAD, mm | 1.751 | 1.459 | 2.102 | < 0.001 |
| LAV, ml | 1.342 | 1.203 | 1.497 | < 0.001 |
| LAVI, ml/m2 | 1.379 | 1.186 | 1.602 | < 0.001 |
Fig. 4Forestplot showing univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression results considering recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia after catheter ablation for AF by using clinical variables
Fig. 5Kaplan–Meier curve of recurrence-free survival between patients with different level of a eGFR (ml/min/1.732) and b LAVI (ml/m2)