First-line Therapy For Atrial Fibrillation Research Articles

Pulsed Field Ablation as First-line Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: A Substudy of the EU-PORIA Registry.

Recent studies have demonstrated the benefit of early ablation in preventing the progression of atrial fibrillation (AF). Clinical practice has reflected this shift in AF management and no longer requires patients to fail antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) before receiving ablation. However, there is limited evidence on outcomes with pulsed field ablation (PFA) as a first-line therapy. Examination of real-world data may shed light on clinical practices and the effectiveness of PFA with and without a prior history of AAD usage. EU-PORIA is an all-comer AF registry enrolling consecutive patients treated with the pentaspline PFA catheter at 7 high-volume centers in Europe. This subanalysis evaluates patients with a history of class I/III AAD use versus those with no documented history of class I/III AAD use (first-line patients). Patients with incomplete AAD history, long-standing persistent AF, and those undergoing a repeat ablation procedure were excluded. Patients were treated and followed based on institutional standard of care. Any episode of atrial tachycardia or AF lasting longer than 30 s was considered an arrhythmia recurrence. Of 1233 patients enrolled in EU-PORIA, 1091 met the inclusion criteria (mean age, 66 years; 40% females; and persistent AF, 36%). Pulmonary vein isolation-only was used in 90% of the patients, and 10% received extra-PV ablation. Ablation as the first-line approach was chosen in 589 patients, and 502 patients had prior class I/III AAD use. In the first-line PFA group, paroxysmal AF was more frequent (68% versus 59%; P<0.001), and pulmonary vein isolation-only was more frequent (93% versus 86%; P<0.001). At 1-year follow-up, freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia recurrence was similar in the ablation-first versus the ablation after failed AAD group (78% versus 74%, respectively; P=0.076). In this large real-world PFA registry, freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia recurrence after 1 year was similar in patients undergoing PFA as a first-line treatment and those with prior failed AAD therapy. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05823818.

Outcomes of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Among Older Adults in the United States: A Nationwide Study

BackgroundPulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is increasingly recommended as first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation. Recent data suggest growing PVI volumes but rising complication rates, although comprehensive real-world outcomes including both inpatient and outpatient encounters remain unclear. ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate patient characteristics, population rates, and 30-day outcomes of PVI in a nationwide sample of U.S. adults aged >65 years. MethodsFirst-time PVIs were identified among U.S. Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries using Current Procedural Terminology procedural codes. Comorbidities were ascertained using International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision diagnosis codes associated with each procedural claim. Outcomes included periprocedural complications, all-cause hospitalizations, and mortality at 30 days. ResultsFrom January 2017 through December 2021, a total of 227,133 patients underwent PVI (mean age 72.5 years, 42% women, 92.7% White) with an increasing comorbidity burden over time. PVI volume increased from 83.8 (2017) to 111.6 per 100,000 patient-years (2021), which was driven by outpatient procedures (87.8% of all PVIs). Concurrently, there was a significant decrease in complication rates (3.9% in 2017 vs 3.1% in 2021; P < 0.001) and hospitalizations (8.8% vs 7.0%; P < 0.001), with no significant change in mortality (0.4%; P = 0.08). The most common periprocedural complications were bleeding (1.8%), pericardial effusion (1.4%), and vascular access damage (0.8%). ConclusionsThe use of PVI has steadily increased among older patients in contemporary U.S. clinical practice; yet, cumulative complication and hospitalization rates at 30 days have decreased over time, with stably low rates of short-term mortality despite rising comorbidity burden among treated patients. These data may reassure patients and providers on the safety of PVI as an increasingly common first-line procedure for atrial fibrillation.

Quality of Life and Safety Outcomes after First-Line Treatment of Symptomatic AF with Cryoablation or Drug Therapy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Cryoablation has emerged as a recognized interventional strategy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Numerous trials have investigated cryoablation as a first-line therapy for AF. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of cryoablation on quality of life (QoL) and safety outcomes compared to antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with symptomatic AF. A comprehensive search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cryoablation and AADs as first-line treatments for AF until May 2023. Continuous outcome data were analyzed using mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and dichotomous outcome data were analyzed using relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. The primary outcomes assessed were QoL and serious adverse events. Our analysis included four RCTs involving 928 patients. Cryoablation was associated with a significant improvement in the AF Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT) score (3 trials; MD 7.46, 95% CI 2.50 to 12.42; p = 0.003; = 79%) and EQ-VAS score (2 trials; MD 1.49, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.86; p 0.001; = 0%) compared to AAD therapy. Additionally, cryoablation demonstrated a modest increase in EQ-5D score from baseline compared to AAD therapy, with no statistically significance (2 trials; MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.07; p = 0.07; = 79%). Furthermore, the rate of serious adverse events was significantly lower with cryoablation compared to AAD therapy (4 trials; 11.8% vs. 16.3%; RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-1.00; p = 0.05; = 0%). Cryoablation was also associated with a reduction in overall adverse events, incidence of persistent AF, hospitalizations, and additional ablation. However, there was no significant difference in major adverse cardiovascular events and emergency department visits between the two treatment groups. Cryoablation, as a first-line treatment for symptomatic AF patients, significantly improved AF-specific quality of life and reduced serious adverse events, as well as overall adverse events, persistent AF, hospitalizations, and additional ablation compared to AADs.

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: Current Practice and Future Perspectives.

Catheter ablation to perform pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is established as a mainstay in rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this review is to provide an overview of current practice and future perspectives in AF ablation. The main clinical benefit of AF ablation is the reduction of arrhythmia-related symptoms and improvement of quality of life. Catheter ablation of AF is recommended, in general, as a second-line therapy for patients with symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent AF, who have failed or are intolerant to pharmacological therapy. In selected patients with heart failure and reduced left-ventricular fraction, catheter ablation was proven to reduce all-cause mortality. Also, optimal management of comorbidities can reduce AF recurrence after AF ablation; therefore, multimodal risk assessment and therapy are mandatory. To date, the primary ablation tool in widespread use is still single-tip catheter radiofrequency (RF) based ablation. Additionally, balloon-based pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has gained prominence, especially due to its user-friendly nature and established safety and efficacy profile. So far, the cryoballoon (CB) is the most studied single-shot device. CB-based PVI is characterized by high efficiency, convincing success rates, and a beneficial safety profile. Recently, CB-PVI as a first-line therapy for AF was shown to be superior to pharmacological treatment in terms of efficacy and was shown to reduce progression from paroxysmal to persistent AF. In this context, CB-based PVI gains more and more importance as a first-line treatment choice. Non-thermal energy sources, namely pulsed-field ablation (PFA), have garnered attention due to their cardioselectivity. Although initially applied via a basket-like ablation tool, recent developments allow for point-by-point ablation, particularly with the advent of a novel lattice tip catheter.

Ablation as First-line Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation.

AF is a chronic and progressive heart rhythm disorder characterised by exacerbations and remissions. Contemporary guidelines recommend antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) as the initial therapy for the maintenance of sinus rhythm. However, these medications have modest efficacy and are associated with significant adverse effects. Several recent trials have evaluated catheter ablation as an initial therapy for AF, demonstrating that cryoballoon catheter ablation significantly improves arrhythmia outcomes (e.g. atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence and arrhythmia burden), produces clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported outcomes (e.g. symptoms and quality of life), and significantly decreases healthcare resource usage (e.g. hospitalisation), without increasing the risk of serious adverse events. Moreover, in contrast to antiarrhythmic drugs, catheter ablation appears to be disease-modifying, significantly reducing the progression of disease. These findings are relevant to patients, providers, and healthcare systems, helping inform the initial choice of rhythm-control therapy in patients with treatment-naïve AF.

Procedural performance between two cryoballoon systems for ablation of atrial fibrillation depends on pulmonary vein anatomy.

Cryoballoon ablation is a first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation. We compared the efficacy and safety of two ablation systems and addressed the influence of pulmonary vein (PV) anatomy on performance and outcome. We consecutively enrolled 122 patients who were planned for first-time cryoballoon ablation. Patients were assigned 1:1 for ablation with the POLARx or the Arctic Front Advance Pro (AFAP) system and followed-up for 12months. Procedural parameters were recorded during the ablation. Before the procedure, a magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) of the PVs was generated and diameter, area, and shape of each PV ostium were assessed. We applied an evaluated PV anatomical scoring system on our MRA measurement data ranging from 0 (best anatomical combination) to 5. Procedures performed with POLARx were associated with shorter time to balloon temperature -30°C (p < .001), lower balloon nadir temperature (p < .001), and longer thawing time till 0°C (p < .001) in all PVs, however, time to isolation was similar. We observed a decreasing performance with each increase in the score for the AFAP, whereas the POLARx performed constant regardless of the score. At 1 year, AF recurred in 14 of 44 patients treated with AFAP (31.8%) and in 10 of 45 patients treated with POLARx (22.2%) (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI 0.28 to 1.37; p=.225). There was no significant correlation between PV anatomy and clinical outcome. We found significant differences in cooling kinetics, especially when anatomical conditions are difficult. However, both systems have a comparable outcome and safety profile.

It’s Time to Consider Ablation as First-Line Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation

It’s Time to Consider Ablation as First-Line Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation

Abstract 9496: 30-days Mortality Risk in the Patients Following Atrial Fibrillation Ablation in the Entire Nation of Poland: An 8-Year Analysis from National Health Fund of Poland

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia. Catheter Ablation (CA) is considered as a first-line therapy for AF. The risk of 30-days all-cause mortality associated with CA for AF may be underestimated in clinical trials and selected-cohort studies due to selection bias. Hypothesis: We evaluated 30-days all-cause mortality associated with CA for AF in the entire country of Poland Methods: The data was collected from the Polish national healthcare service (the National Health Fund of Poland). In the Polish health system covers &gt;99% of CA for AF for the entire country. All consecutive CA in patients &gt;18 years of age, between Jan 2012 and Dec 2019 were included in the study. CA for AF was identified by unique codes assigned to pulmonary vein isolation and CA for AF. The mortality rate was calculated for each age group. Results: During 8-year follow-up period, 31,214 CA of AF were performed in 26,767 patients. 9315 (34.8%) patients were female. 13758 (51.4%) patients had Cryoballoon ablation. Thirty-two deaths (0.1%) within 30-days of the CA were identified. The mortality rate was low and similar in each age group except in the oldest age group (age&gt;80). The oldest age group had significantly higher 30-days mortality than any other age group. (Figure). Conclusions: In the large, consecutive patient population in the entire country of Poland, 30- days mortality following AF ablation for past 8-years remains low. In real-world clinical practice patients over the age of 80 have higher risk of 30-day all-cause mortality than any other age group found over last seven years. Systematic review is needed to further risk-stratify these findings.

Incidence and Predictors of 30-day Acute Cerebrovascular Accidents Post Atrial Fibrillation Catheter Ablation (From the Nationwide Readmissions Database)

Catheter-based ablation is increasingly being used as first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF). Cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) are a known complication. In this study, we investigate the 30-day incidence and predictors of acute CVA postcatheter ablation for AF. The Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2010 to September 2015 was queried for hospitalizations with an ablation procedure and a concurrent AF diagnosis. The primary end point was a composite end point of CVA during index admission or readmission for CVA within 30 days of admission for index hospitalization. The associations between the incidence of end points and the covariates of interest; which included age, gender, hospital characteristics (size, procedural volume, urban/rural status, and teaching status), CHA2DS2-VASc co-morbidity score and its components was assessed using logistic regression. Appropriate survey weighting methodology was applied to generate nationally representative estimates. Of 67,090 weighted hospitalizations for AF ablation, 566 (0.8%) had CVA within 30 days post-ablation. In multivariate regression analysis, factors associated with CVA included hypertension (odds ratio [OR] 1.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04, 1.85), heart failure (OR 4.97, 95% CI 3.32, 7.44), previous stroke/ transient ischemic attack (OR 3.25, 95% CI 2.39, 4.42) and a lower procedural volume (OR for higher procedural volume: 0.6, 95% CI 0.42, 0.85). CHA2DS2-VASc score (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.17, 1.39) was associated with CVA in univariate analysis. In conclusion, the CVA incidence within 30-day of catheter-based AF ablation therapy was 0.8%. Higher CHA2DS2-VASc score was associated with higher risk of CVA post-ablation. Hypertension, heart failure, previous stroke/transient ischemic attack, and procedural volume were independently associated with CVA post-ablation.

Clinical Outcomes of Rate vs Rhythm Control for Atrial Fibrillation in Older People: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is highly prevalent in older adults and has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. To reduce this AF-related morbidity in older adults, antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) are regularly used for rhythm control, assuming that increasing time in sinus rhythm reduces AF-related morbidity. However, whether AADs can improve clinical outcomes in older adults remains unclear because of the increased risk for adverse drug events compared with rate control. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of rhythm control versus rate control on clinical outcomes in older adults with AF. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis targeting patients aged ≥65years with AF and using drugs to control rate or rhythm. Articles that met the following criteria were included: enrolled older patients (sample mean ≥75years) with AF, compared pharmacological rate versus rhythm control, and reported all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or ischemic stroke. Five observational studies were included. In total, 86,926 patients with AF with a mean age ranging from 75 to 92years were studied. No differences were found between rhythm and rate control for all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1.59; I2 = 79.6%; n = 28,526; four studies) and cardiovascular mortality (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.81-1.47; I2 = 0%; n = 2292; two studies). Rhythm control resulted in fewer strokes (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.93; I2 = 0%; n = 59,496), although this was mainly determined by one study. All collected data were observational, which precluded making strong recommendations. Furthermore, all CIs were wide, increasing the uncertainty of the observed effects. As such, evidence was insufficient to recommend rhythm or rate control as the first-line therapy for AF in older adults. As AF is particularly prevalent in older people, more randomized controlled trials are needed in this population.

2019 AGS Beers Criteria for older adults

2019 AGS Beers Criteria for older adults

Catheter Ablation as First-Line Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: Ready for Prime-Time?

Current guidelines include atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation as part of the management strategy in patients that have failed at least one oral antiarrhythmic drug treatment course. However, growing evidence derived from both randomized and non-randomized studies demonstrate lower rates of AF recurrence and AF burden in patients with paroxysmal AF that are naïve to antiarrhythmic drug treatment. Furthermore, progression from paroxysmal AF to persistent AF appears to be delayed by early catheter ablation of AF. The current review addresses the question of the best timing for ablation in patients with paroxysmal AF and provides the rationale for offering AF ablation as first-line therapy based on the most updated evidence available.

Catheter ablation as first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation: an analysis of available evidence

In patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation refractory to antiarrhythmic therapy, catheter ablation is effective in restoring and maintaining sinus rhythm, in reducing hospitalization and improving quality of life. On the other hand, the role of catheter ablation as first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation is still controversial and has been recently evaluated by two randomized controlled trials and two consecutive case series. These studies showed the superiority of catheter ablation over antiarrhythmic therapy for the rhythm control of atrial fibrillation, with similar rates of complications between the two groups. According to these results, catheter ablation could be considered as first-line therapy for patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation without significant heart disease.

Abstract 18526: Catheter Ablation as a First-Line Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation - A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Catheter ablation (CA) has been shown to be superior to anti-arrhythmic therapy (AAD) for drug-refractory atrial fibrillation (AF). Whether CA is superior to AAD as a first-line therapy for AF is not clear. We performed meta-analysis of all prospective studies assessing the efficacy of CA as first line therapy for paroxysmal AF. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane library and Embase for observational studies and randomized control trials (RCT) assessing CA as first-line therapy for AF. Recurrence rates of AF after CA and AADs in these studies were extracted and analyzed. Random effects model with inverse variance weighting was used to calculate relative risk (RR) of AF recurrence after CA in comparison to AADs. Results: We identified 5 prospective trials (3 RCTs and 2 observational) (n=597) of which 3 RCTs compared the efficacy of CA with AADs and the other 2 observational studies evaluated AF recurrence after CA (no comparator group). Follow-up duration ranged from 12 to 24 months across the studies. In these 5 studies, 353 and 244 AF patients received CA and AADs as first line therapy respectively. Pooled data of 353 CA patients revealed AF recurrence rate of 0.28 (95% CI, 0.23 - 0.33). Pooled data of 244 patients who received AADs revealed AF recurrence of 0.44 (95% CI, 0.38 -0.51). Random effects model including the 3 RCTs demonstrated that catheter ablation was associated with a significantly lower AF recurrence rate when compared with AADs (RR: 0.5; 95% CI, 0.28 -0.89; p =0.02). Conclusion: As a first-line therapy strategy for paroxysmal AF, CA is associated with 50% lesser recurrence of AF when compared to AADs.

Ablation as First-Line Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: Not Yet for All.

Studies have established the superiority of atrial fibrillation ablation in controlling the rhythm compared with medical therapy. The procedure, however, has significant associated risks. Whether ablation therapy would improve the major outcomes of survival and stroke is not yet established. Until this information becomes available, ablation should continue to be used as a second-line option for most patient subgroups when one or more antiarrhythmic medications are ineffective.

Ablation as First-Line Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: Yes.

This article addresses the use of catheter ablation (CA) as first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF). CA increases long-term freedom from AF, reduces hospitalizations, and improves quality of life compared with antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy in patients with symptomatic AF who have already failed one AAD. The role of CA as first-line therapy for AF, however, is still controversial. Evidence from randomized controlled trials shows that CA is definitely superior to AADs as first-line therapy for relatively young patients with paroxysmal AF, with comparable complication rates and results consistently reproducible across different institutions, operators, and types of ablation approaches.

Atrial Fibrillation: What Have Recent Trials Taught Us Regarding Pharmacologic Management of Rate and Rhythm Control?

The management of atrial fibrillation (AF) focuses on control of heart rate, correction of rhythm disturbance, prophylaxis of thromboembolism, treatment of underlying disorders, and pathophysiologic mechanisms, and more recently on costs, hospitalizations, and other AF consequences. The goals of therapy are to reduce morbidity and mortality and improve quality of life (QOL). Several large studies have examined the relative efficacy of rhythm- versus rate-control strategies with respect to these outcomes, and have largely failed to demonstrate a survival advantage with either approach by intention-to-treat analysis--both in patients with and without heart failure (HF). However, the results do not support the hypothesis that rate control is preferable as first-line therapy for AF with respect to survival and do not disprove the hypothesis that maintenance of sinus rhythm is preferable to the continuation of AF, particularly if rate control fails to restore adequate QOL or if selective approaches are employed. Many post hoc analyses and substudies have assessed QOL, functional status, and exercise tolerance, with the majority demonstrating important benefits associated with achievement of rhythm control. Moreover, some subanalyses and additional trials have suggested that sinus rhythm can be associated with longer survival, including in patients with HF. In addition, ATHENA demonstrated that a drug, dronedarone, could improve the composite endpoint of cardiovascular hospitalizations and all-cause mortality in a carefully selected, high-risk, nonpermanent AF population, in addition to its recognized reduction in AF. This review examines the clinical outcomes of several important AF trials, discusses the limitations in applying the major morbidity/mortality findings to everyday clinical practice, and summarizes the lessons learned.

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: First-Line Therapy?

Background: Ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is a widely-accepted treatment for this arrhythmia. Ablation is traditionally reserved for second-line therapy in patients who have failed drug therapy, but it may be ready for first-line treatment. Objective: This article outlines the rationale for using ablation as first-line therapy for AF. Findings: AF increases both morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, drug-based therapy for AF is very ineffective and may contribute adversely to both patient morbidity and mortality. Ablation addresses the root causes of AF and thus may be curative. The technique for ablation has become quite consistent and the outcomes better than those with drug therapy. The complication risk is also acceptably low. There is even preliminary evidence to suggest that AF ablation is superior as first-line treatment compared to drugs. Conclusion: AF ablation is rapidly evolving towards becoming first-line therapy for some patients with this debilitating arrhythmia.

Catheter ablation should not be first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation is a relatively novel procedure that has rapidly become widely practiced. In this Viewpoint, Hugh Calkins highlights the potential dangers of this intervention, and cautions that it is premature to adopt catheter ablation as first-line therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation until data from large, prospective multicenter clinical trials are available.

Pulmonary-vein isolation with radiofrequency ablation as first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation

Pulmonary-vein isolation with radiofrequency ablation as first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation