Quality of life and healthcare utilisation improvements after atrial fibrillation ablation.

OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) guided by a standardised CLOSE (contiguous optimised lesions) protocol has been shown to increase clinical success after catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). This study analysed healthcare utilisation and quality of life (QOL) outcomes from a large multicentre prospective study, measured association between QOL and atrial fibrillation (AF) burden and identified factors associated with lack of QOL improvement. METHODS: CLOSE-guided ablation was performed in 329 consecutive patients (age 61.4 years, 60.8% male) with drug-refractory PAF in 17 European centres. QOL was measured at baseline and 12 months post-ablation via Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy of Life Survey (AFEQT) and EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. All-cause and cardiovascular hospitalisations and cardioversions over 12 months pre-ablation and post-ablation were recorded. Rhythm monitoring included weekly and symptom-driven trans-telephonic monitoring, plus ECG and Holter monitoring at 3, 6 and 12 months. AF burden was defined as the percentage of postblanking tracings with an atrial tachyarrhythmia ≥30 s. Continuous measures across multiple time points were analysed using paired t-tests, and associations between various continuous measures were analysed using independent sample t-tests. Each statistical test used two-sided p values with a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: Both QOL instruments showed significant 12-month improvements across all domains: AFEQT score increased 25.1-37.5 points and 33.3%-50.8% fewer patients reporting any problem across EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L domains. Overall, AFEQT improvement was highly associated with AF burden (p=0.009 for <10% vs ≥10% burden, p<0.001 for <20% vs ≥20% burden). Cardiovascular hospitalisations were significantly decreased after ablation (42%, p=0.001). Patients without substantial improvement in AFEQT (55/301, 18.2%) had higher AFEQT and CHA2DS2-VASc scores at baseline, and higher AF burden following PVI. CONCLUSIONS: QOL improved and healthcare utilisation decreased significantly after ablation with a standardised CLOSE protocol. QOL improvement was significantly associated with impairment at baseline and AF burden after ablation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03062046.

Complications in pulmonary vein isolation in the Netherlands Heart Registration differ with sex and ablation technique.

AIMS: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has become a cornerstone of the invasive treatment of atrial fibrillation. Severe complications are reported in 1-3% of patients. This study aims to compare complications and follow-up outcome of PVI in patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS AND RESULTS: The data were extracted from the Netherlands Heart Registration. Procedural and follow-up outcomes in patients treated with conventional radiofrequency (C-RF), multielectrode phased RF (Ph-RF), or cryoballoon (CB) ablation from 2012 to 2017 were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed to identify variables associated with complications and repeat ablations. In total, 13 823 patients (69% male) were included. The reported complication incidence was 3.6%. Patients treated with C-RF developed more cardiac tamponades (C-RF 0.8% vs. Ph-RF 0.3% vs. CB 0.3%, P ≤ 0.001) and vascular complications (C-RF 1.7% vs. Ph-RF 1.2% vs. CB 1.3%, P ≤ 0.001). Ph-RF was associated with fewer bleeding complications (C-RF: 1.0% vs. Ph-RF: 0.4% vs. CB: 0.7%, P = 0.020). Phrenic nerve palsy mainly occurred in patients treated with CB (C-RF: 0.1% vs. Ph-RF: 0.2% vs. CB: 1.5%, P ≤ 0.001). In total, 18.4% of patients were referred for repeat ablation within 1 year. Female sex, age, and CHA2DS2-VASc were independent risk factors for cardiac tamponade and bleeding complications, with an adjusted OR for female patients of 2.97 (95% CI 1.98-4.45) and 2.02 (95% CI 1.03-4.00) respectively. CONCLUSION: The reported complication rate during PVI was low. Patients treated with C-RF ablation were more likely to develop cardiac tamponades and vascular complications. Female sex was associated with more cardiac tamponade and bleeding complications.

Standardized pulmonary vein isolation workflow to enclose veins with contiguous lesions: the multicentre VISTAX trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of pulmonary vein isolation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) using a standardized workflow aiming to enclose the veins with contiguous and optimized radiofrequency lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: This multicentre, prospective, non-randomized study was conducted at 17 European sites. Pulmonary vein isolation was guided by VISITAG SURPOINT (VS target ≥550 on the anterior wall; ≥400 on the posterior wall) and intertag distance (≤6 mm). Atrial arrhythmia recurrence was stringently monitored with weekly and symptom-driven transtelephonic monitoring on top of standard-of-care monitoring (24-h Holter and 12-lead electrocardiogram at 3, 6, and 12 months follow-up). Three hundred and forty participants with drug refractory PAF were enrolled. Acute effectiveness (first-pass isolation proof to a 30-min wait period and adenosine challenge) was 82.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 77.4-86.7%]. At 12-month follow-up, the rate of freedom from any documented atrial arrhythmia was 78.3% (95% CI 73.8-82.8%), while freedom from atrial arrhythmia by standard-of-care monitoring was 89.4% (95% CI 78.8-87.0%). Freedom fromrepeat ablations by the Kaplan-Meier analysis was 90.4% during 12 months of follow-up. Of the 34 patients with repeat ablations, 14 (41.2%) demonstrated full isolation of all pulmonary vein circles. Primary adverse event (PAE) rate was 3.6% (95% CI 1.9-6.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The VISTAX trial demonstrated that a standardized PAF ablation workflow aiming for contiguous lesions leads to low rates of PAEs, high acute first-pass isolation rates, and 12-month freedom from arrhythmias approaching 80%. Further research is needed to improve the reproducibility of the outcomes across a wider range of centres.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03062046, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03062046.