Search

Introduction: Limited data exist on pulsed‐field ablation (PFA) in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) undergoing left atrial posterior wall isolation (LAPWI). Methods: The Advanced TecHnologies For SuccEssful AblatioN of AF in Clinical Practice (ATHENA) prospective registry included consecutive patients referred for PeAF catheter ablation at 9 Italian centers, treated with the FARAPULSETM‐PFA system. The primary efficacy and safety study endpoints were the acute LAPWI rate, freedom from arrhythmic recurrences and the incidence of major periprocedural complications. Patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone, PWI + LAPWI and redo procedures were compared. Results: Among 249 patients, 21.7% had long‐standing PeAF, 79.5% were male; mean age was 63 ± 9 years. LAPWI was performed in 57.6% of cases, with 15.3% being redo procedures. Median skin‐to‐skin times (PVI‐only 68 [60−90] vs. PVI + LAPWI 70 [59−88] mins) did not differ between groups. 45.8% LAPWI cases were approached with a 3D‐mapping system, and 37.3% with intracardiac echocardiography. LAPWI was achieved in all patients by means of PFA alone, in 88.8% cases at first pass. LAPWI was validated either by an Ultrahigh‐density mapping system or by recording electrical activity + pacing maneuvers. No major complications occurred, while 2.4% minor complications were detected. During a median follow‐up of 273 [191–379] days, 41 patients (16.5%) experienced an arrhythmic recurrence after the 90‐day blanking period, with a mean time to recurrence of 223 ± 100 days and no differences among ablation strategies. Conclusion: LAPWI with PFA demonstrates feasibility, rapidity, and safety in real‐world practice, offering a viable alternative for PeAF patients. LAPWI is achievable even with a fluoroscopy‐only method and does not significantly extend overall procedural times. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Risk stratification in asymptomatic patients remains by far the most important yet unresolved clinical problem in the Brugada syndrome (BrS).Objectives: This study sought to analyze the usefulness of electrocardiographic parameters as markers of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in BrS.Methods: This study analyzed data from 347 consecutive patients (78.4% male; mean age 45 ± 13.1 years) with spontaneous type 1 BrS by ECG parameters but with no history of cardiac arrest (including 91.1% asymptomatic at presentation, 5.2% with a history of atrial fibrillation [AF], and 4% with a history of arrhythmic syncope). Electrocardiographic characteristics at the first clinic visit were analyzed to predict ventricular fibrillation (VF)/SCD during follow-up.Results: During the follow-up (48 ± 38 months), 276 (79.5%) patients remained asymptomatic, 39 (11.2%) developed syncope, and 32 (9.2%) developed VF/SCD. Patients who developed VF/SCD had a lower prevalence of SCN5A gene mutations (p = 0.009) and a higher prevalence of positive electrophysiological study results (p < 0.0001), a family history of SCD (p = 0.03), and AF (p < 0.0001). The most powerful marker for VF/SCD was a significant S-wave (≥0.1 mV and/or ≥40 ms) in lead I. In the multivariate analysis, the duration of S-wave in lead I ≥40 ms (hazard ratio: 39.1) and AF (hazard ratio: 3.7) were independent predictors of VF/SCD during follow-up. Electroanatomic mapping in 12 patients showed an endocardial activation time significantly longer in patients with an S-wave in lead I, mostly because of a significant delay in the anterolateral right ventricular outflow tract.Conclusions: The presence of a wide and/or large S-wave in lead I was a powerful predictor of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias in patients with BrS and no history of cardiac arrest at presentation. However, the prognostic value of a significant S-wave in lead I should be confirmed by larger studies and by an independent confirmation cohort of healthy subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]