No antiarrhythmic effect of direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patients undergoing catheter ablation.

INTRODUCTION: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are superior to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with elevated stroke risk. Possible antiarrhythmic effects of DOACs have been discussed. We analyzed impact of DOAC treatment on recurrence-free survival after AF catheter ablation. METHODS: Two-hundred and thirty-nine consecutive patients (median age 57 [IQR 48-64] years, 26.4% female) undergoing ablation for paroxysmal AF were included into this study. 68.6% of them received DOACs (DOAC group), 31.4% VKA (VKA group). The primary outcome was arrhythmia-free one-year survival. RESULTS: DOAC patients had lower BMI, shorter history of AF, less arterial hypertension, less vascular disease, less use of antiarrhythmics and consequently lower CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED Scores. There was no difference in arrhythmia-free survival between DOAC and VKA groups (DOAC: 86.6%, VKA: 76.7%, p = 0.286). CONCLUSIONS: Despite baseline characteristics favouring a better outcome of DOAC patients, arrhythmia-free survival was similar in both groups. Consequently, DOAC treatment did not have clinically relevant antiarrhythmic properties in these patients.

Indications and Outcome in Patients Undergoing Left Atrial Appendage Closure-The Austrian LAAC Registry.

BACKGROUND: Complete real-world data on the indications and outcomes of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) outside of clinical trials are rare. In this study, we stratified patients undergoing LAAC by indication groups. METHODS: This analysis of the national multicentre Austrian LAAC Registry comprised all patients that underwent LAAC up until 2018 at the currently active centres in Austria. The baseline characteristics, procedural details and outcomes between the following indication groups were compared: bleeding as an indication for LAAC ("bleeding" group) vs. thromboembolism despite oral anticoagulation (OAC; "thromboembolism" group) vs. an intolerance to OAC for reasons other than the above ("other" group). RESULTS: The analysis included 186 patients, with 59.7% in the "bleeding" group, 8.1% in the "thromboembolism" group and 32.2% in the "other" group. The CHADS2 score was the highest in the "thromboembolism" group and the HAS-BLED score was the highest in the "bleeding" group. The procedural outcomes were similar between groups (implantation success, 97.3%), with major complications occurring in 7.0% of patients. One-year survival free from stroke, bleeding or LAAC-associated hospitalisation was 83.9%, 90.0% and 81.4% in the "bleeding", "thromboembolism" and "other" groups, respectively (p = 0.891). CONCLUSIONS: In routine clinical practice, LAAC was used in a heterogeneous patient population with atrial fibrillation (AF) and contraindication, inefficacy or intolerance to OAC. The long-term outcome was favourable in all groups.

Is there a difference in rhythm outcome between patients undergoing first line versus second line paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation?

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is an established second line therapy for patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF (PAF) and may be considered as a first line therapy in selected patients who are highly symptomatic, considering patient choice, benefit, and risk, according to recent guidelines. Our study investigated whether a first line vs. second line ablation approach may result in improved sinus rhythm maintenance after ablation. METHODS: A total of 153 patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation for PAF were included in the study (age 55±12 years, 29% female). Seventy-nine patients underwent first line AF ablation and 74 patients underwent second line AF ablation after failed antiarrhythmic drug therapy. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics such as age, history of AF, left atrial size or LVEF between groups. Success was defined as atrial tachyarrhythmia free survival during a 12-month follow-up by means of serial ECG Holter monitoring. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in cumulative arrhythmia-free survival between those patients who received AF ablation as a first or second line therapy. Single procedure success was 78% in the first line group vs. 81% in the second line group; multiple procedure success was 90 vs. 91%, (n.s.). Complication rate was 1.3% vs. 1.4% (n.s.). CONCLUSION: Success of AF ablation did not differ between patients who receive ablation as first vs. second line therapy. Based on these data, a trial of AAD therapy before AF ablation may be justified in most patients with symptomatic PAF eligible for rhythm control.