Further Insight into the Technique and Outcomes of “Curative” Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation

Abstract

During the past decade, catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has emerged as an important treatment option for patients with symptomatic AF refractory to ≥1 antiarrhythmic agents. Electric isolation of the pulmonary vein musculature (PVI) has been identified as the primary end point for both catheter- and surgical-based AF ablation procedures.1 What is less clear is whether the addition of “linear lesions” or ablation of atrial sites demonstrating complex atrial electrograms improves outcome for patients with paroxysmal, persistent, or long-standing persistent AF.2,3 This issue remains an area of active discussion, debate, and investigation. Article see p 269 In this issue of Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology , Gaita et al2 report the results of a prospective single-center randomized study of 204 patients who underwent catheter ablation for treatment of paroxysmal or persistent/permanent AF. Patients were stratified according to whether they had paroxysmal (n=125) or persistent/permanent (n=79) AF and were then randomized in a 2:1 fashion to undergo PVI alone or PVI combined with a “roof line” and a “left mitral line.” Follow-up visits that included an ECG, 24-hour Holter, and an echocardiogram were set up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 30 months and then every year thereafter. If a patient experienced symptoms between follow-up visits, an event monitor was prescribed. A recurrence was defined as a symptomatic or asymptomatic episode of AF or atrial flutter lasting ≥30 seconds after a 2-month blanking period. Patients who developed a recurrence after the blanking period were offered a repeat ablation procedure. The outcome of ablation was evaluated at 12 months of follow-up and at completion of the study. Each patient was followed for a minimum of 3 years. Among the 125 patients with paroxysmal AF, the single-procedure success rate at 12 months was 46% with PVI alone versus …