Nassir F Marrouche1, Oussama Wazni2, Christopher McGann3, Tom Greene4, J Michael Dean4, Lilas Dagher1, Eugene Kholmovski5, Moussa Mansour6, Francis Marchlinski7, David Wilber8, Gerhard Hindricks9, Christian Mahnkopf10, Darryl Wells3, Pierre Jais11, Prashanthan Sanders12, Johannes Brachmann10, Jeroen J Bax13,14, Leonie Morrison-de Boer4, Thomas Deneke15, Hugh Calkins16, Christian Sohns17, Nazem Akoum18. 1. Cardiology Department, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana. 2. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 3. Swedish Center, Seattle, Washington. 4. University of Utah, Salt Lake City. 5. Cardiology Department, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 6. Cardiology Department, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston. 7. Cardiology Department, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 8. Cardiology Department, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 9. Cardiology Department, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany. 10. Klinikum Coburg, Coburg, Germany. 11. Cardiology Department, Segalen University, Bordeaux, France. 12. Cardiology Department, Adelaide Medical School, Adelaide, Australia. 13. Cardiology Department, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. 14. Cardiology Department, Turku Heart Center, Turku, Finland. 15. Heart Center Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt, Germany. 16. Cardiology Department, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. 17. Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany. 18. Cardiology Department, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle.
Abstract
Importance: Ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a challenge. Left atrial fibrosis plays an important role in the pathophysiology of AF and has been associated with poor procedural outcomes. Objective: To investigate the efficacy and adverse events of targeting atrial fibrosis detected on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in reducing atrial arrhythmia recurrence in persistent AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Efficacy of Delayed Enhancement-MRI-Guided Fibrosis Ablation vs Conventional Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation trial was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized clinical trial involving 44 academic and nonacademic centers in 10 countries. A total of 843 patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic persistent AF and undergoing AF ablation were enrolled from July 2016 to January 2020, with follow-up through February 19, 2021. Interventions: Patients with persistent AF were randomly assigned to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus MRI-guided atrial fibrosis ablation (421 patients) or PVI alone (422 patients). Delayed-enhancement MRI was performed in both groups before the ablation procedure to assess baseline atrial fibrosis and at 3 months postablation to assess for ablation scar. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was time to first atrial arrhythmia recurrence after a 90-day blanking period postablation. The primary safety composite outcome was defined by the occurrence of 1 or more of the following events within 30 days postablation: stroke, PV stenosis, bleeding, heart failure, or death. Results: Among 843 patients who were randomized (mean age 62.7 years; 178 [21.1%] women), 815 (96.9%) completed the 90-day blanking period and contributed to the efficacy analyses. There was no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia recurrence between groups (fibrosis-guided ablation plus PVI patients, 175 [43.0%] vs PVI-only patients, 188 [46.1%]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95 [95% CI, 0.77-1.17]; P = .63). Patients in the fibrosis-guided ablation plus PVI group experienced a higher rate of safety outcomes (9 [2.2%] vs 0 in PVI group; P = .001). Six patients (1.5%) in the fibrosis-guided ablation plus PVI group had an ischemic stroke compared with none in PVI-only group. Two deaths occurred in the fibrosis-guided ablation plus PVI group, and the first one was possibly related to the procedure. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with persistent AF, MRI-guided fibrosis ablation plus PVI, compared with PVI catheter ablation only, resulted in no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia recurrence. Findings do not support the use of MRI-guided fibrosis ablation for the treatment of persistent AF. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02529319.
Importance: Ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a challenge. Left atrial fibrosis plays an important role in the pathophysiology of AF and has been associated with poor procedural outcomes. Objective: To investigate the efficacy and adverse events of targeting atrial fibrosis detected on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in reducing atrial arrhythmia recurrence in persistent AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Efficacy of Delayed Enhancement-MRI-Guided Fibrosis Ablation vs Conventional Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation trial was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized clinical trial involving 44 academic and nonacademic centers in 10 countries. A total of 843 patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic persistent AF and undergoing AF ablation were enrolled from July 2016 to January 2020, with follow-up through February 19, 2021. Interventions: Patients with persistent AF were randomly assigned to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus MRI-guided atrial fibrosis ablation (421 patients) or PVI alone (422 patients). Delayed-enhancement MRI was performed in both groups before the ablation procedure to assess baseline atrial fibrosis and at 3 months postablation to assess for ablation scar. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was time to first atrial arrhythmia recurrence after a 90-day blanking period postablation. The primary safety composite outcome was defined by the occurrence of 1 or more of the following events within 30 days postablation: stroke, PV stenosis, bleeding, heart failure, or death. Results: Among 843 patients who were randomized (mean age 62.7 years; 178 [21.1%] women), 815 (96.9%) completed the 90-day blanking period and contributed to the efficacy analyses. There was no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia recurrence between groups (fibrosis-guided ablation plus PVI patients, 175 [43.0%] vs PVI-only patients, 188 [46.1%]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95 [95% CI, 0.77-1.17]; P = .63). Patients in the fibrosis-guided ablation plus PVI group experienced a higher rate of safety outcomes (9 [2.2%] vs 0 in PVI group; P = .001). Six patients (1.5%) in the fibrosis-guided ablation plus PVI group had an ischemic stroke compared with none in PVI-only group. Two deaths occurred in the fibrosis-guided ablation plus PVI group, and the first one was possibly related to the procedure. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with persistent AF, MRI-guided fibrosis ablation plus PVI, compared with PVI catheter ablation only, resulted in no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia recurrence. Findings do not support the use of MRI-guided fibrosis ablation for the treatment of persistent AF. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02529319.
Authors: Sascha Rolf; Simon Kircher; Arash Arya; Charlotte Eitel; Philipp Sommer; Sergio Richter; Thomas Gaspar; Andreas Bollmann; David Altmann; Carlos Piedra; Gerhard Hindricks; Christopher Piorkowski Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2014-08-23
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Gerhard Hindricks; Riccardo Cappato; Young-Hoon Kim; Eduardo B Saad; Luis Aguinaga; Joseph G Akar; Vinay Badhwar; Josep Brugada; John Camm; Peng-Sheng Chen; Shih-Ann Chen; Mina K Chung; Jens Cosedis Nielsen; Anne B Curtis; D Wyn Davies; John D Day; André d'Avila; N M S Natasja de Groot; Luigi Di Biase; Mattias Duytschaever; James R Edgerton; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; Patrick T Ellinor; Sabine Ernst; Guilherme Fenelon; Edward P Gerstenfeld; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Robert H Helm; Elaine Hylek; Warren M Jackman; Jose Jalife; Jonathan M Kalman; Josef Kautzner; Hans Kottkamp; Karl Heinz Kuck; Koichiro Kumagai; Richard Lee; Thorsten Lewalter; Bruce D Lindsay; Laurent Macle; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Gregory F Michaud; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Ken Okumura; Douglas Packer; Evgeny Pokushalov; Matthew R Reynolds; Prashanthan Sanders; Mauricio Scanavacca; Richard Schilling; Claudio Tondo; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; Atul Verma; David J Wilber; Teiichi Yamane Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Bawer J Tofig; Peter Lukac; Jan M Nielsen; Esben S S Hansen; Rasmus S Tougaard; Henrik K Jensen; Jens C Nielsen; Steen B Kristiansen Journal: Europace Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Felipe Bisbal; Eva Benito; Albert Teis; Francisco Alarcón; Axel Sarrias; Gala Caixal; Roger Villuendas; Paz Garre; Nina Soto; Jennifer Cozzari; Eduard Guasch; Gladys Juncà; Susanna Prat-Gonzalez; Rosario J Perea; Victor Bazán; José María Tolosana; Elena Arbelo; Antoni Bayés-Genís; Lluis Mont Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2020-10-08
Authors: Mobin Kheirkhahan; Alex Baher; Matin Goldooz; Eugene G Kholmovski; Alan K Morris; Ibolya Csecs; Mihail G Chelu; Brent D Wilson; Nassir F Marrouche Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: A Sultan; J Lüker; D Andresen; K H Kuck; E Hoffmann; J Brachmann; M Hochadel; S Willems; L Eckardt; T Lewalter; J Senges; D Steven Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 4.379