Strategies for repeat ablation for atrial fibrillation: a multicentre comparison of non-pulmonary vein versus pulmonary vein target ablation

Abstract

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Approximately 18% of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergo a repeat ablation within 12 months after their index ablation. Despite the high prevalence, comparative studies on non-pulmonary vein (PV) target strategies in repeat AF ablation are scarce. Purpose: This study aims to describe 12 months efficacy of non-PV and PV target ablations as a repeat ablation strategy. Methods A multicentre retrospective, descriptive study was conducted with data of 280 patients who underwent repeat AF ablation. Ablation strategy for repeat ablation was at the operators’ discretion. Non-PV target ablation (n=140) included posterior wall isolation, mitral line, roofline and/or complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation. PV target ablation (n=140), included re-isolation and/or wide atrium circumferential ablation. Patients’ demographics and rhythm outcomes during 12-months follow-up were analysed. Results: Overall, the mean age was 63 ± 9 years, 64% were male, and body mass index was 27.1 ± 4.2. Patients undergoing non-PV target ablation had more frequently persistent AF (47.9% vs 14.3%, p < 0.001), and had a higher CHA2DS2 VASc (2.0 vs 1.3, p < 0.001). At 12 months, more atrial tachyarrhythmias were observed in the non-PV target group (48.6%) compared to the PV target group (29.3%, p=0.001). Similarly, a significantly higher AF and atrial tachycardia (AT) recurrence rate was observed after non-PV target ablation compared to PV target ablation (36.4% versus 22.1% and 22.9% versus 10.7%). After adjusting for several associated covariates, a significantly higher AT recurrence risk remained in the non-PV target group (adjusted OR 2.19 95% CI 1.18 – 4.42, p = 0.023) (Figure 1C). Sensitivity analysis was performed with inverse propensity weighting to assess the robustness of the multivariate model and demonstrated comparable outcomes. Both groups significantly de-escalated anti-arrhythmic drug use, de-escalation was more profound after PV target ablation. Patients with isolated PVs during non-PV target ablation had a significantly higher risk for AF recurrence than those with reconnected PVs (Figure 1B). Conclusion: Compared to PV target ablation, non-PV target repeat ablation did not improve outcomes after 12 months and was independently associated with a higher risk for AT recurrences.