Search

Aims: Reduction of atrial fibrillation (AF) burden is the preferred outcome measure over categorical AF rhythm recurrence after AF ablation. In this sub-analysis of the TeleCheck-AF project, we tested the feasibility of smartphone app-based approximation of time spent with AF and/or symptoms., Methods and Results: Patients scheduled for at least one teleconsultation during the 12-month follow-up after AF ablation were instructed to use a smartphone photoplethysmography-based application for simultaneous symptom and rhythm monitoring three times daily for 1 week. Proxies of time spent with AF and/or symptoms (% recordings, load, and % days), temporal aggregation of AF and/or symptoms (density), and symptom-rhythm correlation (SRC) were assessed. In total, 484 patients (60% male, 62 ± 9.9 years) were included. Adherence, motivation, and patient satisfaction were high. %AF recordings, AF load, and %AF days (rs = 0.88-0.95) and %symptom recordings, symptom load, and %symptom days (rs = 0.95-0.98) showed positive correlations. The SRC correlated negatively with time spent with symptoms (rs = -0.65-0.90) and with time spent with AF (rs = -0.31-0.34). In patients with paroxysmal AF before ablation and AF during the monitoring period, 87% (n = 39/44) had a low-density score <50% ('paroxysmal AF pattern') while 5% (n = 2/44) had a high-density score >90% ('persistent AF pattern'). Corresponding numbers for patients with persistent AF before ablation were 48% (n = 11/23) and 43% (n = 10/23), respectively., Conclusion: On-demand, app-based simultaneous rhythm and symptom assessment provides objective proxies of time spent with AF and/or symptoms and SRC, which may assist in assessing AF and symptom outcomes after AF ablation., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: E.S., A.N.L.H., M.G., K.B., A.So., C.H.F., R.M.J.v.d.V., D.V., D.Sc., A.Su., D.St., R.P., M.H., P.L., D.G., H.G., N.A.H.A.P., J.M.H., M.N., M.M., and D.L. declared no conflict of interests. D.D. received modest lecture honorary, travel grants, and/or a fellowship grant from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, Medtronic, Microport, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Zoll. H.A.K.H. received modest lecture honorary and/or a fellowship grant from AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, and Zoll., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Superior vena cava (SVC) isolation during atrial fibrillation catheter ablation is limited by the risk of collateral damage to the sinus node and/or the phrenic nerve. Due to its tissue-specificity, we hypothesized the feasibility and safety of pulsed-field ablation (PFA)-based SVC isolation., Methods and Results: One hundred and five consecutive patients undergoing PFA-based AF catheter ablation were prospectively included. After pulmonary vein isolation (±posterior wall isolation and electrical cardioversion), SVC isolation was performed using a standardized workflow. Acute SVC isolation was achieved in 105/105 (100%) patients after 6 ± 1 applications. Transient phrenic nerve stunning occurred in 67/105 (64%) patients but without phrenic nerve palsy at the end of the procedure and at hospital discharge. Transient high-degree sinus node dysfunction occurred in 5/105 (4.7%) patients, with no recurrence at the end of the procedure and until discharge. At the 3-month follow-up visit, no complication occurred., Conclusion: SVC isolation using a pentaspline PFA catheter is feasible and safe., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: P.O. received consulting fees from Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. M.M. received speaker fees/honoraria from Abbott, Bayer Healthcare, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Amomed, AOP Orphan, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, and BMS/Pfizer and research grants from Biosense Webster and Abbott. S.C. received consulting fees/honoraria from Abbott and Boston Scientific. P.M. received consulting fees from Biotronik and Boston Scientific. L.C.-R. received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Microport CRM. F.A. received consulting fees and speaker honoraria from Microport CRM, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is an emerging technology for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF), for which pre-clinical and early-stage clinical data are suggestive of some degree of preferentiality to myocardial tissue ablation without damage to adjacent structures. Here in the MANIFEST-17K study we assessed the safety of PFA by studying the post-approval use of this treatment modality. Of the 116 centers performing post-approval PFA with a pentaspline catheter, data were received from 106 centers (91.4% participation) regarding 17,642 patients undergoing PFA (mean age 64, 34.7% female, 57.8% paroxysmal AF and 35.2% persistent AF). No esophageal complications, pulmonary vein stenosis or persistent phrenic palsy was reported (transient palsy was reported in 0.06% of patients; 11 of 17,642). Major complications, reported for ~1% of patients (173 of 17,642), were pericardial tamponade (0.36%; 63 of 17,642) and vascular events (0.30%; 53 of 17,642). Stroke was rare (0.12%; 22 of 17,642) and death was even rarer (0.03%; 5 of 17,642). Unexpected complications of PFA were coronary arterial spasm in 0.14% of patients (25 of 17,642) and hemolysis-related acute renal failure necessitating hemodialysis in 0.03% of patients (5 of 17,642). Taken together, these data indicate that PFA demonstrates a favorable safety profile by avoiding much of the collateral damage seen with conventional thermal ablation. PFA has the potential to be transformative for the management of patients with AF., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the corner stone of modern rhythm control strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) is prevalent in more than 50% of patients undergoing AF ablation, and studies have indicated a greater recurrence rate after PVI in patients with SDB. Herein, we study the effect of catheter-based PVI on AF in a pig model for SDB., Methods and Results: In 11 sedated spontaneously breathing pigs, obstructive apnoeas were simulated by 75 s of intermittent negative upper airway pressure (INAP) applied by a negative pressure device connected to the endotracheal tube. Intermittent negative upper airway pressures were performed before and after PVI. AF-inducibility and atrial effective refractory periods (aERPs) were determined before and during INAP by programmed atrial stimulation. Pulmonary vein isolation prolonged the aERP by 48 ± 27 ms in the right atrium (RA) (P < 0.0001) and by 40 ± 34 ms in the left atrium (LA) (P = 0.0004). Following PVI, AF-inducibility dropped from 28 ± 26% to 0% (P = 0.0009). Intermittent negative upper airway pressure was associated with a transient aERP-shortening (ΔaERP) in both atria, which was not prevented by PVI (INAP indued ΔaERP after PVI in the RA: -57 ± 34 ms, P = 0.0002; in the LA: -42 ± 24 ms, P < 0.0001). Intermittent negative upper airway pressure was associated with a transient increase in AF-inducibility (from 28 ± 26% to 69 ± 21%; P = 0.0008), which was not attenuated by PVI [INAP-associated AF-inducibility after PVI: 58 ± 33% (P = 0.5)]., Conclusion: Transient atrial arrhythmogenic changes related to acute obstructive respiratory events are not prevented by electrical isolation of the pulmonary veins, which partially explains the increased AF recurrence in patients with SDB after PVI procedures., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone is insufficient to treat many patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF). Adjunctive left atrial posterior wall (LAPW) ablation with thermal technologies has revealed lack of efficacy, perhaps limited by the difficulty in achieving lesion durability amid concerns of esophageal injury., Objectives: This study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of PVI + LAPW ablation vs PVI in patients with PersAF using pulsed-field ablation (PFA)., Methods: In a retrospective analysis of the MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) registry, we studied consecutive PersAF patients undergoing post-approval treatment with a pentaspline PFA catheter. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from any atrial arrhythmia of ≥30 seconds. Safety outcomes included the composite of acute and chronic major adverse events., Results: Of the 547 patients with PersAF who underwent PFA, 131 (24%) received adjunctive LAPW ablation. Compared to PVI-alone, patients receiving adjunctive LAPW ablation were younger (65 vs 67 years of age, P = 0.08), had a lower CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score (2.3 ± 1.6 vs 2.6 ± 1.6, P = 0.08), and were more likely to receive electroanatomical mapping (48.1% vs 39.0%, P = 0.07) and intracardiac echocardiography imaging (46.1% vs 17.1%, P < 0.001). The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmias was not statistically different between groups in the full (PVI + LAPW: 66.4%; 95% CI: 57.6%-74.4% vs PVI: 73.1%; 95% CI: 68.5%-77.2%; P = 0.68) and propensity-matched cohorts (PVI + LAPW: 71.7% vs PVI: 68.5%; P = 0.34). There was also no significant difference in major adverse events between the groups (2.2% vs 1.4%, respectively, P = 0.51)., Conclusions: In patients with PersAF undergoing PFA, as compared to PVI-alone, adjunctive LAPW ablation did not improve freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 12 months., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Boston Scientific provided a grant to help fund data collection but was not otherwise involved with study design or analysis nor did they have access to this manuscript before submission. Dr Turagam has received consulting fees from Biosense Webster; and has received speaker honorarium from Sanofi and Medtronic. Dr Neuzil has received grants from the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic, DRO (NHH, 00023884). Dr Schmidt has received speaker fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. Dr Reichlin has received grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation, the Swiss Heart Foundation, and the sitem insel support fund; has received speaker/consulting honoraria or travel support from Abbott/SJM, Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, and Pfizer-BMS; and has received support for his institution’s fellowship program from Abbott/SJM, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Metzner has received grants and fees from Farapulse. Dr Hansen has received speaker fees and grant support from Biosense Webster and Medtronic. Dr Blaauw has received grants from Medtronic and Atricure; and has received consulting fees from Abbott, Biosense Webster, and Boston Scientific. Dr Sommer has been a member of the advisory boards for Abbott, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Anic has received consultant fees from Farapulse Inc, Boston Scientific Inc, Galaxy Medical Inc, Biosense Webster; and has performed contracted research for Farapulse Inc, Boston Scientific Inc, Galaxy Medical Inc, and Biosense Webster. Dr Anselme has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Microport CRM. Dr Boveda has received consulting fees from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Microport, Zoll, and BMS. Dr Deneke has received speaker honoraria from Galaxy Medical, Abbott, and Biotronik; has received consulting fees from Farapulse; and has served on a Clinical Events Committee for Boston Scientific. Dr Willems has received grants and personal fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic; and has received personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Brystol Myers Squibb, Bayer Vital, Accutus, Daiichi, and Farapulse Inc. Dr Tilz reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical, Biotronik, Biosense Webster and speaker honorarium from Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical, Biotronik, Biosense Webster. Dr Scherr has received an educational grant from Farapulse Inc; and is a consultant For Boston Scientific Inc. Dr Wakili has received consulting fees and travel expenses from Boston Scientific and Biotronik; has received investigator-initiated funding for research projects (initiated by him) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Boston Scientific; and has received speaking honoraria from Boston Scientific, Biotronik, and Medtronic. Dr Scherr has received speaking fees from Pfizer, Bayer, Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Medtronic; has received grants from Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Boston Scientific; and has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Johnson & Johnson. Dr Kautzner has received personal fees from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, and Abbott for participation in scientific advisory boards; and has received speaker honoraria from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, CathVision, Medtronic, Mylan, Pfizer, ProMed, and Abbott. Dr Jais has received partial funding from IHU LIRYC ANR-10-IAHU-04; has received equity from Farapulse; and has received consulting fees and grants from Boston Scientific. Dr Chun has received speaker fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. Dr Roten has received speaker honoraria from Abbott/SJM; has received consulting honoraria from Medtronic; and has received research funding to the institution from Medtronic. Dr Lemoine has received grants from Farapulse. Dr Rollin has received grants from Farapulse. Dr Nentwich has received speaker fees from Farapulse, Inc. Dr Gunawardine has received grants from Farapulse Inc and Abbott. Dr Heeger has received travel grants and research grants from Boston Scientific, Lifetech, Biosense Webster, and Cardiofocus; has received speaker honoraria from Boston Scientific, Lifetech, Biosense Webster, Bayer, and Cardiofocus; and has received consulting fees from Medtronic, Lifetech, Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster, and Cardiofocus. Dr Manninger has received speaker fees from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Amomed, AOP Orphan, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, and BMS/Pfizer; and has received grants from Biosense Webster and Abbott. Dr Sultan has received lecture and consulting honoraria from Medtronic, Abbott, and Bayer. Dr Derval has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific. Dr Reddy has received consulting fees (and equity – now divested) from Farapulse Inc; has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific Inc; and, unrelated to this manuscript, has served as a consultant for and has equity in Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera-Medtronic, Apama Medical-Boston Scientific, Anumana, APN Health, Aquaheart, Atacor, Autonomix, Axon Therapies, Backbeat, BioSig, CardiaCare, CardioNXT/AFTx, Circa Scientific, CoRISMA, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou DiNovA EP Technology, East End Medical, EPD-Philips, EP Frontiers, Epix Therapeutics-Medtronic, EpiEP, Eximo, Field Medical, Focused Therapeutics, HRT, Intershunt, Javelin, Kardium, Keystone Heart, Laminar, LuxMed, Medlumics, Middlepeak, Neutrace, Nuvera-Biosense Webster, Oracle Health, Restore Medical, Sirona Medical, SoundCath, Valcare; also unrelated to this work, he has received consulting fees from AtriAN, Biosense-Webster, BioTel Heart, Biotronik, Cairdac, Cardiofocus, Cardionomic, CoreMap, Fire1, Gore & Associates, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Novartis, Philips, and Pulse Biosciences; and he has equity in Manual Surgical Sciences, Newpace, Nyra Medical, Surecor, and Vizaramed. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Pulse field ablation (PFA) is a novel nonthermal ablation modality for treatment of atrial fibrillation. While mostly lacking 3D electroanatomical mapping integration, reported radiation doses in procedures using multielectrode PFA catheters are relatively high. We report a first case series of three patients where a zero-fluoroscopy approach by intracardiac echocardiography was utilized and present a possible workflow for zero-fluoroscopy ablation with the Farapulse PFA system., (© 2023 The Authors. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Importance: Previous studies evaluating the association of patient sex with clinical outcomes using conventional thermal ablative modalities for atrial fibrillation (AF) such as radiofrequency or cryoablation are controversial due to mixed results. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel AF ablation energy modality that has demonstrated preferential myocardial tissue ablation with a unique safety profile., Objective: To compare sex differences in patients undergoing PFA for AF in the Multinational Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Postapproval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation (MANIFEST-PF) registry., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study of MANIFEST-PF registry data, which included consecutive patients undergoing postregulatory approval treatment with PFA to treat AF between March 2021 and May 2022 with a median follow-up of 1 year. MANIFEST-PF is a multinational, retrospectively analyzed, prospectively enrolled patient-level registry including 24 European centers. The study included all consecutive registry patients (age ≥18 years) who underwent first-ever PFA for paroxysmal or persistent AF., Exposure: PFA was performed on patients with AF. All patients underwent pulmonary vein isolation and additional ablation, which was performed at the discretion of the operator., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinically documented atrial arrhythmia for 30 seconds or longer after a 3-month blanking period. The primary safety outcome was the composite of acute (<7 days postprocedure) and chronic (>7 days) major adverse events (MAEs)., Results: Of 1568 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.5 [11.5] years; 1015 male [64.7%]) with AF who underwent PFA, female patients, as compared with male patients, were older (mean [SD] age, 68 [10] years vs 62 [12] years; P < .001), had more paroxysmal AF (70.2% [388 of 553] vs 62.4% [633 of 1015]; P = .002) but had fewer comorbidities such as coronary disease (9% [38 of 553] vs 15.9% [129 of 1015]; P < .001), heart failure (10.5% [58 of 553] vs 16.6% [168 of 1015]; P = .001), and sleep apnea (4.7% [18 of 553] vs 11.7% [84 of 1015]; P < .001). Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in 99.8% of female (552 of 553) and 98.9% of male (1004 of 1015; P = .90) patients. Additional ablation was performed in 22.4% of female (124 of 553) and 23.1% of male (235 of 1015; P = .79) patients. The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was similar in male and female patients (79.0%; 95% CI, 76.3%-81.5% vs 76.3%; 95% CI, 72.5%-79.8%; P = .28). There was also no significant difference in acute major AEs between groups (male, 1.5% [16 of 1015] vs female, 2.5% [14 of 553]; P = .19)., Conclusion and Relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that after PFA for AF, there were no significant sex differences in clinical effectiveness or safety events.

Background: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel ablation technology recently adopted in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Currently, little is known about the durability of PFA ablation lesions., Methods: We investigated patients who underwent redo-ablation due to recurrent AF/atrial-flutter or tachycardia (AFL/AT) following PVI with PFA. We report electrophysiological findings and ablation strategy during redo-ablation., Results: Of 447 patients undergoing index PVI with PFA, 14 patients (age: 61.9±10.8 years; 7 (50.0%) males; left atrial volume index (n=10): 39.4±14.6 mL/m 2 ) were referred for redo-ablation. Initial indication was paroxysmal-AF in 7 patients, persistent-AF in 6 and long-standing-persistent-AF in one patient. Mean time-to-recurrence was 4.9±1.9 months. Three patients received additional posterior-wall-isolation during index PFA. Twelve (85.7%) patients suffered AF recurrence and 5/12 had concomitant AFL. In the remaining 2 patients, one had a (box-dependent) AFL, and one had an atypical AT. No patients had all PVs reconnected. Reconnection in zero, one, two or three PVs was found in 35.7%, 21.4%, 14.3%, and 28.6% of patients, respectively. All 7 patients with zero or one reconnection with AF recurrence received additional/repeat posterior-wall-isolation during re-ablation, while in the others, PVs were re-isolated. Patients with only AFL/AT had no reconnection of PVs, and the substrate was successfully ablated., Conclusions: Durable PVI (all PV's isolated) was observed in over one-third of patients at re-do. The predominant recurrent arrhythmia following PVI-only was AF. Concomitant (35.7%) or isolated (14.3%) AFL/AT recurrence was observed in 50% of patients., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Pulsed field ablation is a novel nonthermal cardiac ablation modality using ultra-rapid electrical pulses to cause cell death by a mechanism of irreversible electroporation. Unlike the traditional ablation energy sources, pulsed field ablation has demonstrated significant preferentiality to myocardial tissue ablation, and thus avoids certain thermally mediated complications. However, its safety and effectiveness remain unknown in usual clinical care., Methods: MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-Approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) is a retrospective, multinational, patient-level registry wherein patients at each center were prospectively included in their respective center registries. The registry included all patients undergoing postapproval treatment with a multielectrode 5-spline pulsed field ablation catheter to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) between March 1, 2021, and May 30, 2022. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinical documented atrial arrhythmia (AF/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia) of ≥30 seconds on the basis of electrocardiographic data after a 3-month blanking period (on or off antiarrhythmic drugs). Safety outcomes included the composite of acute (<7 days postprocedure) and latent (>7 days) major adverse events., Results: At 24 European centers (77 operators) pulsed field ablation was performed in 1568 patients with AF: age 64.5±11.5 years, female 35%, paroxysmal/persistent AF 65%/32%, CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc 2.2±1.6, median left ventricular ejection fraction 60%, and left atrial diameter 42 mm. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 99.2% of patients. After a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 367 (289-421) days, the 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was 78.1% (95% CI, 76.0%-80.0%); clinical effectiveness was more common in patients with paroxysmal AF versus persistent AF (81.6% versus 71.5%; P =0.001). Acute major adverse events occurred in 1.9% of patients., Conclusions: In this large observational registry of the postapproval clinical use of pulsed field technology to treat AF, catheter ablation using pulsed field energy was clinically effective in 78% of patients with AF., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Reddy reports receiving consulting fees (and equity—now divested) from Farapulse Inc. and is a consultant for Boston Scientific Inc; unrelated to this manuscript, Dr Reddy also serves as a consultant for and has equity in Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera-Medtronic, Apama Medical-Boston Scientific, Anumana, APN Health, Aquaheart, Atacor, Autonomix, Axon Therapies, Backbeat, BioSig, CardiaCare, CardioNXT/ AFTx, Circa Scientific, CoRISMA, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou DiNovA EP Technology, East End Medical, EPD-Philips, EP Frontiers, Epix Therapeutics-Medtronic, EpiEP, Eximo, Field Medical, Focused Therapeutics, HRT, Intershunt, Javelin, Kardium, Keystone Heart, LuxMed, Medlumics, Middlepeak, Neutrace, Nuvera-Biosense Webster, Oracle Health, Restore Medical, Sirona Medical, SoundCath, Valcare; unrelated to this work, has served as a consultant for AtriAN, Biosense-Webster, BioTel Heart, Biotronik, Cairdac, Cardiofocus, Cardionomic, CoreMap, Fire1, Gore & Associates, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Novartis, Philips, Pulse Biosciences; and has equity in Manual Surgical Sciences, Newpace, Nyra Medical, Surecor, and Vizaramed. Dr Schmidt reports receiving speaker’s fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. Dr Reichlin reports research grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation, the Swiss Heart Foundation, and the sitem insel Support Fund. Speaker/consulting honoraria or travel support from Abbott/SJM, Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, and Pfizer-BMS. Support for his institution’s fellowship programme from Abbott/SJM, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Roten reports receiving speaker honoraria from Abbott/SJM, consulting honoraria from Medtronic, and research funding to the institution from Medtronic. Dr Neven reports speaker’s fees from Farapulse, Inc. Dr Metzner reports research grant and fees from Farapulse. Dr Rollin reports receiving research grant from Farapulse. Dr Lemoine reports receiving research grant from Farapulse. Dr Hansen reports receiving speaker fees and grant support from Biosense Webster, and Medtronic. Dr Blaauw reports receiving research grants from Medtronic and Atricure and consulting fees from Abbott, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific. Dr Sommer reports member of the advisory board for Abbott, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Anic reports receiving consultant fees from Farapulse Inc., Boston Scientific Inc., Galaxy Medical Inc., Biosense Webster, and performs contracted research for Farapulse Inc., Boston Scientific Inc., Galaxy Medical Inc., and Biosense Webster. Dr Anselme reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Microport CRM. Dr Boveda reports receiving consulting fees from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Microport, Zoll, and BMS. Dr Deneke reports receiving speaker honoraria from Galaxy Medical, Abbott, and Biotronik, being a consultant to Farapulse, and serving on a Clinical Events Committee for Boston Scientific. Dr Willems reports receiving grants and personal fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Brystol Myers Squibb, Bayer Vital, Accutus, Daiichi, and Farapulse Inc. Dr Gunawardene reports grants from Farapulse Inc. and Abbott. Dr Tilz reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical, Biotronik, Biosense Webster and speaker honorarium from Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical, Biotronik, and Biosense Webster. Dr Heeger received travel grants and research grants by Boston Scientific, Lifetech, Biosense Webster, and Cardiofocus and Speaker´s Honoraria from Boston Scientific, Lifetech. Biosense Webster, Bayer, and Cardiofocus. He is a consultant of Medtronic, Lifetech, Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster, and Cardiofocus. Dr Scheer reports receiving an educational grant from Farapulse Inc. and is a consultant for Boston Scientific Inc. Dr Wakili reports receiving consultant fees and travel expenses from Boston Scientific and Biotronik; investigator-initiated funding for research projects (initiated by him) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Boston Scientific; and speaking honoraria from Boston Scientific, Biotronik, and Medtronic. Dr Steven reports receiving speaking fees from Pfizer, Bayer, Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Medtronic; grants from Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Boston Scientific; and consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Johnson & Johnson. Dr Sultan reports receiving lecture and consulting honoraria from Medtronic, Abbott, and Bayer. Dr Kautzner reports personal fees from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, and Abbott for participation in scientific advisory boards, and has received speaker honoraria from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, CathVision, Medtronic, Mylan, Pfizer, ProMed, and Abbott. Dr Jais reports receiving equity from Farapulse and consulting fees and grant from Boston Scientific. Dr Derval reports receiving consulting fees from Boston scientific. Dr Chun reports receiving speaker’s fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. Dr Neuzil reports receiving grants from the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic, DRO (NHH, 00023884). Dr Manninger reports receiving speaker fees from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Amomed, AOP Orphan, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, BMS/Pfizer and research grants from Biosense Webster and Abbott. All remaining authors have declared no conflict of interest.

Aims: The aim of this TeleCheck-AF sub-analysis was to evaluate motivation and adherence to on-demand heart rate/rhythm monitoring app in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods and Results: Patients were instructed to perform 60 s app-based heart rate/rhythm recordings 3 times daily and in case of symptoms for 7 consecutive days prior to teleconsultation. Motivation was defined as number of days in which the expected number of measurements (≥3/day) were performed per number of days over the entire prescription period. Adherence was defined as number of performed measurements per number of expected measurements over the entire prescription period.Data from 990 consecutive patients with diagnosed AF [median age 64 (57-71) years, 39% female] from 10 centres were analyzed. Patients with both optimal motivation (100%) and adherence (≥100%) constituted 28% of the study population and had a lower percentage of recordings in sinus rhythm [90 (53-100%) vs. 100 (64-100%), P < 0.001] compared with others. Older age and absence of diabetes were predictors of both optimal motivation and adherence [odds ratio (OR) 1.02, 95% coincidence interval (95% CI): 1.01-1.04, P < 0.001 and OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.28-0.86, P = 0.013, respectively]. Patients with 100% motivation also had ≥100% adherence. Independent predictors for optimal adherence alone were older age (OR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.04, P = 0.014), female sex (OR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.29-2.23, P < 0.001), previous AF ablation (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.03-1.07, P = 0.028)., Conclusion: In the TeleCheck-AF project, more than one-fourth of patients had optimal motivation and adherence to app-based heart rate/rhythm monitoring. Older age and absence of diabetes were predictors of optimal motivation/adherence., Competing Interests: Conflict of interests: M.G., A.N.L.H., R.M.J.v.d.V., K.B., D.V.M.V., H.A.K.Hi., D.Sc., J.M., A.Su., D.St., E.T., R.P., M.H., L.V., P.L., B.K., L.P., H.G., L.D., H.He., T.d.P., N.A.H.A.P., A.So., D.L., J.M.H. declared no conflicts of interest. D.G. received PI for institutional research grants from Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. N.K. has received research grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation (P400PM-194477), Gottfried und Julia Bangerter-Rhyner-Stiftung, and the European Society of Cardiology. S.E. was employed by Qompium NV. K.V. is a consultant for Medronic, Abbott, Biosense Webster, Philips. M.M. has received speaker honoraria and/or travel grants from Biosense Webster, Abbott, Biotronik, Zoll, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, Pfizer, Amomed, as well as research grants from Biosense Webster. D.D. received lecture honorary, travel grants and/or a fellowship grant from Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Biotronik, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Medtronic, Microport, Pfizer, Zoll. E.S. has received institutional lecture/consulting fees from lecture fees from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb-Pfizer, Boehringer- Ingelheim, Johnson & Johnson, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Sanofi., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Very high-power, short-duration (90-W/4-second) ablation for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) may reduce procedural times. However, shorter applications with higher power may impact lesion quality., Objectives: In this multicenter, randomized controlled trial, the authors compared procedural efficiency, efficacy, and safety of PVI using 90-W/4-second ablation to 35/50-W ablation., Methods: Patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation undergoing first-time PVI were randomized to pulmonary vein encirclement with contiguous applications using very high-power, short-duration applications (90 W over 4 seconds) or 35/50-W applications (titrated up to ablation index >550 anteriorly and >400 posteriorly). Prospective endpoints were procedural efficiency (procedure time and first-pass isolation), safety (including esophageal endoscopic evaluation), and 6-month effectiveness using repetitive Holter monitoring., Results: A total of 180 patients were randomized, 90 to the 90-W group (mean age: 64.2 ± 8.9 years) and 90 to the 35/50-W group (mean age: 62.3 ± 10.8 years). Procedural time was shorter in the 90-W group vs the 35/50-W group (70 [IQR: 60-80] minutes vs 75 [IQR: 65-88.3] minutes; P = 0.009). A nonsignificant trend towards lower rates of first-pass isolation was seen in the 90-W group (83.9% vs 90%; P = 0.0852). No major complications were observed in both groups with esophageal injury occurring in 1 patient per group. At 6 months, 17% of patients in the 90-W group vs 15% in the 35/50-W group experienced recurrent arrhythmia (P = 0.681)., Conclusions: Contiguous ablation using very high-power, short-duration applications results in a significant but modest reduction in procedure time with similar safety and 6-month efficacy vs a conventional approach. A hybrid approach combining both ablation modalities might be the most optimal strategy. (POWER PLUS [Very High Power Ablation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Schedule for a First Pulmonary Vein Isolation]; NCT04784013)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Kobza has served as a consultant for Biosense-Webster, Biotronik, and Medtronic, not related to this work. Drs Duytschaever and Scherr have received speaker fees from Biosense Webster, not related to this work. Dr Manninger has received research grants from Biosense Webster, not related to this work., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Although mobile health tools using photoplethysmography (PPG) technology have been validated for the detection of atrial fibrillation (AF), their utility for heart rate assessment during AF remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the accuracy of continuous PPG-based 1 min mean heart rate assessment during AF., Methods and Results: Persistent AF patients were provided with Holter electrocardiography (ECG) (for ≥24 h) simultaneously with a PPG-equipped smartwatch. Both the PPG-based smartwatch and Holter ECG automatically and continuously monitored patients' heart rate/rhythm. ECG and PPG recordings were synchronized and divided into 1 min segments, from which a PPG-based and an ECG-based average heart rate estimation were extracted. In total, 47 661 simultaneous ECG and PPG 1 min heart rate segments were analysed in 50 patients (34% women, age 73 ± 8 years). The agreement between ECG-determined and PPG-determined 1 min mean heart rate was high [root mean squared error (RMSE): 4.7 bpm]. The 1 min mean heart rate estimated using PPG was accurate within ±10% in 93.7% of the corresponding ECG-derived 1 min mean heart rate segments. PPG-based 1 min mean heart rate estimation was more often accurate during night-time (97%) than day-time (91%, P < 0.001) and during low levels (96%) compared to high levels of motion (92%, P < 0.001). A neural network with a 10 min history of the recording did not further improve the PPG-based 1 min mean heart rate assessment [RMSE: 4.4 (95% confidence interval: 3.5-5.2 bpm)]. Only chronic heart failure was associated with a lower agreement between ECG-derived and PPG-derived 1 min mean heart rates (P = 0.040)., Conclusion: During persistent AF, continuous PPG-based 1 min mean heart rate assessment is feasible in 60% of the analysed period and shows high accuracy compared with Holter ECG for heart rates <110 bpm., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation modality that has demonstrated preferential tissue ablation, including no oesophageal damage, in first-in-human clinical trials. In the MANIFEST-PF survey, we investigated the 'real world' performance of the only approved PFA catheter, including acute effectiveness and safety-in particular, rare oesophageal effects and other unforeseen PFA-related complications., Methods and Results: This retrospective survey included all 24 clinical centres using the pentaspline PFA catheter after regulatory approval. Institution-level data were obtained on patient characteristics, procedure parameters, acute efficacy, and adverse events. With an average of 73 patients treated per centre (range 7-291), full cohort included 1758 patients: mean age 61.6 years (range 19-92), female 34%, first-time ablation 94%, paroxysmal/persistent AF 58/35%. Most procedures employed deep sedation without intubation (82.1%), and 15.1% were discharged same day. Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was successful in 99.9% (range 98.9-100%). Procedure time was 65 min (38-215). There were no oesophageal complications or phrenic nerve injuries persisting past hospital discharge. Major complications (1.6%) were pericardial tamponade (0.97%) and stroke (0.4%); one stroke resulted in death (0.06%). Minor complications (3.9%) were primarily vascular (3.3%), but also included transient phrenic nerve paresis (0.46%), and TIA (0.11%). Rare complications included coronary artery spasm, haemoptysis, and dry cough persistent for 6 weeks (0.06% each)., Conclusion: In a large cohort of unselected patients, PFA was efficacious for PVI, and expressed a safety profile consistent with preferential tissue ablation. However, the frequency of 'generic' catheter complications (tamponade, stroke) underscores the need for improvement., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: V.Y.R. reports receiving consulting fees and equity (stock) from Farapulse Inc. and is a consultant for Boston Scientific Inc.; he also has additional disclosures unrelated to this manuscript that are listed in the Supplementary material online. B.S. reports receiving speaker’s fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. T.R. reports research grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation, the Swiss Heart Foundation, and the sitem insel support fund. Speaker/consulting honoraria or travel support from Abbott/SJM, Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, and Pfizer-BMS. Support for his institution’s fellowship programme from Abbott/SJM, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. L.R. reports receiving speaker honoraria from Abbott/SJM and consulting honoraria from Medtronic. K.N. reports speaker’s Fees from Farapulse, Inc. A.M. reports research grant and fees from Farapulse. A.R. reports receiving research grant from Farapulse. J.H. reports receiving speaker fees and grant support from Biosense Webster and Medtronic. Y.B.: reports receiving Research grant from Medtronic and Atricure and consulting fees from Abbott, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific. P.S. reports member of the advisory board for Abbott, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. C.S. reports receiving modest honoraria from Medtronic. A.A. reports receiving consultant fees from Farapulse Inc., Boston Scientific Inc., Galaxy Medical Inc., Biosense Webster, and performs contracted research for Farapulse Inc., Boston Scientific Inc., Galaxy Medical Inc., Biosense Webster. F.A. reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic and Microport CRM. S.B. reports receiving consulting fees for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Microport, Zoll, and BMS. T.D. reports receiving speaker honoraria from Galaxy Medical, Abbott and Biotronik, being a consultant to Farapulse, and serving on a Clinical Events Committee for Boston Scientific. S.W. reports receiving grants and personal fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Brystol Myers Squibb, Bayer Vital, Accutus, Daiichi, Farapulse Inc. M.G. reports grant from Farapulse Inc. and Abbott. R.T. reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbot Medical, Biotronik, and speakers honorarium from Boston Scientific, Abbot Medical, Biotronik, Biosense Webster. B.K. reports receiving Travel and Congress Sponsoring from Biotronik, Abbott, Impulse Dynamics, DGK AG EP, EHRA, Pfizer; she also received fellowship sponsoring from Johnson & Johnson, Boston Scientific and Lecture Honorary from Biotronik, Impulse Dynamics, C.T.I. GmbH, Doctrina Med. D.S. reports receiving an educational grant from Farapulse Inc., and is a consultant For Boston Scientific Inc. R.W. reports receiving consultant fees and travel expenses from Boston Scientific and Biotronik; investigator-initiated funding for research projects (initiated by him) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Boston Scientific; and speaking honoraria from Boston Scientific, Biotronik, and Medtronic. D.S. reports receiving speaking fees from Pfizer, Bayer, Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Medtronic; grant from Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Boston Scientific; and consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Johnson & Johnson. A.S. reports receiving lecture and consulting honoraria from Medtronic, Abbott, and Bayer. J.K. reports personal fees from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, and Abbott for participation in scientific advisory boards, and has received speaker honoraria from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, CathVision, Medtronic, Mylan, Pfizer, ProMed, and Abbott. P.J. reports receiving equity from Farapulse and consulting fees and grant from Boston Scientific. N.D. reports receiving consulting fees from Boston scientific. J.C. reports receiving speaker’s fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. P.N. reports receiving grant from the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic, DRO (NHH, 00023884). All the remaining authors have declared no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: TeleCheck-AF is a multicentre international project initiated to maintain care delivery for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) during COVID-19 through teleconsultations supported by an on-demand photoplethysmography-based heart rate and rhythm monitoring app (FibriCheck®). We describe the characteristics, inclusion rates, and experiences from participating centres according the TeleCheck-AF infrastructure as well as characteristics and experiences from recruited patients., Methods and Results: Three surveys exploring centre characteristics (n = 25), centre experiences (n = 23), and patient experiences (n = 826) were completed. Self-reported patient characteristics were obtained from the app. Most centres were academic (64%) and specialized public cardiology/district hospitals (36%). Majority of the centres had AF outpatient clinics (64%) and only 36% had AF ablation clinics. The time required to start patient inclusion and total number of included patients in the project was comparable for centres experienced (56%) or inexperienced in mHealth use. Within 28 weeks, 1930 AF patients were recruited, mainly for remote AF control (31% of patients) and AF ablation follow-up (42%). Average inclusion rate was highest during the lockdown restrictions and reached a steady state at a lower level after easing the restrictions (188 vs. 52 weekly recruited patients). Majority (>80%) of the centres reported no problems during the implementation of the TeleCheck-AF approach. Recruited patients [median age 64 (55-71), 62% male] agreed that the FibriCheck® app was easy to use (94%)., Conclusion: Despite different health care settings and mobile health experiences, the TeleCheck-AF approach could be set up within an extremely short time and easily used in different European centres during COVID-19., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Novel wearable devices for heart rhythm analysis using either photoplethysmography (PPG) or electrocardiogram (ECG) are in daily clinical practice. This survey aimed to assess impact of these technologies on physicians' clinical decision-making and to define, how data from these devices should be presented and integrated into clinical practice. The online survey included 22 questions, focusing on the diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (AF) based on wearable rhythm device recordings, suitable indications for wearable rhythm devices, data presentation and processing, reimbursement, and future perspectives. A total of 539 respondents {median age 38 [interquartile range (IQR) 34-46] years, 29% female} from 51 countries world-wide completed the survey. Whilst most respondents would diagnose AF (83%), fewer would initiate oral anticoagulation therapy based on a single-lead ECG tracing. Significantly fewer still (27%) would make the diagnosis based on PPG-based tracing. Wearable ECG technology is acceptable for the majority of respondents for screening, diagnostics, monitoring, and follow-up of arrhythmia patients, while respondents were more reluctant to use PPG technology for these indications. Most respondents (74%) would advocate systematic screening for AF using wearable rhythm devices, starting at patients' median age of 60 (IQR 50-65) years. Thirty-six percent of respondents stated that there is no reimbursement for diagnostics involving wearable rhythm devices in their countries. Most respondents (56.4%) believe that costs of wearable rhythm devices should be shared between patients and insurances. Wearable single- or multiple-lead ECG technology is accepted for multiple indications in current clinical practice and triggers AF diagnosis and treatment. The unmet needs that call for action are reimbursement plans and integration of wearable rhythm device data into patient's files and hospital information systems., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

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 CHA 2 DS 2 -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., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors report no relationships that could be construed as a conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although novel teleconsultation solutions can deliver remote situations that are relatively similar to face-to-face interaction, remote assessment of heart rate and rhythm as well as risk factors remains challenging in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)., Hypothesis: Mobile health (mHealth) solutions can support remote AF management., Methods: Herein, we discuss available mHealth tools and strategies on how to incorporate the remote assessment of heart rate, rhythm and risk factors to allow comprehensive AF management through teleconsultation., Results: Particularly, in the light of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there is decreased capacity to see patients in the outpatient clinic and mHealth has become an important component of many AF outpatient clinics. Several validated mHealth solutions are available for remote heart rate and rhythm monitoring as well as for risk factor assessment. mHealth technologies can be used for (semi-)continuous longitudinal monitoring or for short-term on-demand monitoring, dependent on the respective requirements and clinical scenarios. As a possible solution to improve remote AF care through teleconsultation, we introduce the on-demand TeleCheck-AF mHealth approach that allows remote app-based assessment of heart rate and rhythm around teleconsultations, which has been developed and implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe., Conclusion: Large scale international mHealth projects, such as TeleCheck-AF, will provide insight into the additional value and potential limitations of mHealth strategies to remotely manage AF patients. Such mHealth infrastructures may be well suited within an integrated AF-clinic, which may require redesign of practice and reform of health care systems., (© 2020 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Multiple wearable devices for rhythm analysis have been developed using either photoplethysmography (PPG) or handheld ECG., Hypothesis: The aim of this survey was to assess impact of these technologies on physicians' clinical decision-making regarding initiation of diagnostic steps, drug therapy, and invasive strategies., Methods: The online survey included 10 questions on types of devices, advantages, and disadvantages of wearable devices as well as case scenarios for patients with supraventricular arrhythmias and atrial fibrillation (AF)., Results: A total of 417 physicians (median age 37 [IQR 32-43] years) from 42 countries world-wide completed the survey. When presented a tracing of a regular tachycardia by a symptomatic patient, most participants would trigger further diagnostic steps (90% for single-lead ECG vs 83% for PPG, P < .001), while a single-lead ECG would be sufficient to perform an invasive EP study in approximately half of participants (51% vs 22% for PPG, P < .001). When presented with a single-lead ECG tracing suggesting AF, most participants (90%) would trigger further diagnostic steps. A symptomatic AF patient would trigger anticoagulation treatment to a higher extent as an asymptomatic patient (59% vs 21%, P < .001). PPG tracings would only rarely lead to therapeutic steps regardless of symptoms. Most participants would like scientific society recommendations on the use of wearable devices (62%)., Conclusions: Tracings from wearable rhythm devices suggestive of arrhythmias are most likely to trigger further diagnostic steps, and in the case of PPG recordings rarely therapeutic interventions. A majority of participants expect these devices to facilitate diagnostics and arrhythmia screening but fear data overload and expect scientific society recommendations on the use of wearables., (© 2020 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Development and progression of atrial fibrillation (AF) is driven by comorbidities such as arterial hypertension and diabetes mellitus. In animal models of chronic hyperglycaemia, progression of AF has been proposed to be triggered by oxidative stress, apoptosis and fibrosis. Acute glycosylation of CaMKII has been associated with increased susceptibility to arrhythmias in acute hyperglycaemia. However, the proarrhythmogenic effect of acute hyperglycaemia has not been investigated. Nine healthy, anesthetized pigs (54 ± 6 kg) were instrumented with electrophysiologic catheters and a multielectrode array on the epicardium of the left atrial anterior wall. Left and right atrial effective refractory periods (AERP), inducibility of AF and left atrial epicardial conduction velocities (CV) were measured at baseline (BL), increasing steps of blood glucose (200-500 mg/dL in steps of 100 mg/dL by glucose infusion) and repeated after normalisation of blood glucose levels (recovery). Serum electrolytes were kept constant during measurements by means of sodium and potassium infusion. There were no significant differences in AERP, CV or AF inducibility between BL and recovery. Heart rate remained constant regardless of blood glucose levels (BL: 103 ± 18 bpm, 500 mg/dL: 103 ± 18 bpm, r = 0.02, p = 0.346). Mean left as well as right AERP increased with higher glucose levels. CV increased with glucose levels (1.25 (1.04, 1.67) m/s at BL vs. 1.53 (1.22, 2.15) m/s at 500 mg/dL, r = 0.85, p = 0.034). Rate of AF inducibility in the left atrium remained constant throughout the whole protocol (AF episodes > 10 s: mean inducibility of 80% at BL vs. 69% at 500 mg/dL, p = 0.32, episodes > 30 s: 0% at BL vs. 0% at 500 mg/dL, p = 0.17). Our data imply that acute hyperglycaemia is associated with lower arrhythmogenic substrate and does not promote AF inducibility.

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., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Arterial hypertension (HT) contributes to progression of atrial fibrillation (AF) via unknown mechanisms., Objective: We aimed to characterize electrical and structural changes accounting for increased AF stability in a large animal model of rapid atrial pacing (RAP)-induced AF combined with desoxycorticosterone acetate (DOCA)-induced HT., Methods: Eighteen pigs were instrumented with right atrial endocardial pacemaker leads and custom-made pacemakers to induce AF by continuous RAP (600 beats/min). DOCA pellets were subcutaneously implanted in a subgroup of 9 animals (AF+HT group); the other 9 animals served as controls (AF group). Final experiments included electrophysiology studies, endocardial electroanatomic mapping, and high-density mapping with epicardial multielectrode arrays. In addition, 3-dimensional computational modeling was performed., Results: DOCA implantation led to secondary HT (median [interquartile range] aortic pressure 109.9 [100-137] mm Hg in AF+HT vs 82.2 [79-96] mm Hg in AF; P < .05), increased AF stability (55.6% vs 12.5% of animals with AF episodes lasting >1 hour; P < .05), concentric left ventricular hypertrophy, atrial dilatation (119 ± 31 cm 2 in AF+HT vs 78 ± 23 cm 2 in AF; P < .05), and fibrosis. Collagen accumulation in the AF+HT group was mainly found in non-intermyocyte areas (1.62 ± 0.38 cm 3 in AF+HT vs 0.96 ± 0.3 cm 3 in AF; P < .05). Left and right atrial effective refractory periods, action potential durations, endo- and epicardial conduction velocities, and measures of AF complexity were comparable between the 2 groups. A 3-dimensional computational model confirmed an increase in AF stability observed in the in vivo experiments associated with increased atrial size., Conclusion: In this model of secondary HT, higher AF stability after 2 weeks of RAP is mainly driven by atrial dilatation., (Copyright © 2018 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Application of therapeutic mild hypothermia in patients after resuscitation, often accompanied by myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, and systemic inflammation may impact on cardiac rhythm. We therefore tested susceptibility to atrial arrhythmias during hyperthermia (HT, 40.5°C), normothermia (NT, 38.0°C), and mild hypothermia (MH, 33.0°C)., Methods: Nine healthy, anesthetized closed-chest landrace pigs were instrumented with a quadripolar stimulation catheter in the high right atrium and a decapolar catheter in the coronary sinus. Twelve-lead surface electrograms were recorded and core body temperature was altered to HT, NT, and MH using external warming or intravascular cooling. Repetitive measurements of effective atrial refractory period (AERP), atrial fibrillation (AF) inducibility, and electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters at different heart rates were performed., Results: During MH, AERP was significantly longer while the inducibility of AF was significantly higher compared to NT and HT (median [range]: HT 18 (0, 80)%; NT 25 (0, 80)%; MH 68 (0, 100)%; P < 0.05 MH vs NT+HT). Mean AF duration did not differ between groups. Arterial potassium levels decreased with falling temperatures (HT: 4.2 ± 0.1 mmol/L; NT: 4.0 ± 0.2 mmol/L; MH: 3.5 ± 0.1 mmol/L; P < 0.001). Surface ECGs during MH showed reduced spontaneous heart rate (HT: 99 ± 13 beats/min; NT: 87 ± 15 beats/min; MH: 66 ± 10 beats/min; P < 0.05), increased PQ, stim-Q, and QT intervals (P < 0.01) but no change in QRS duration or time from peak to end of the T wave interval., Conclusion: Our data imply that MH represents an arrhythmic substrate rendering the atria more susceptible to AF although conduction times as well as refractory periods are increased. Further investigations on potential electrophysiological limits of therapeutic cooling in patients are required., (© 2018 The Authors. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: There is controversial evidence if atrial fibrillation (AF) alters outcome after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). TAVI itself may promote new-onset AF (NOAF)., Methods: We performed a single-center study including 398 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI. Before TAVI, patients were divided into a sinus rhythm (SR) group (n=226, 57%) and baseline AF group (n=172, 43%) according to clinical records and electrocardiograms. Furthermore, incidence and predictors of NOAF were recorded., Results: Baseline AF patients had a significantly higher 1-year mortality than the baseline SR group (19.8% vs. 11.5%, p=0.02). NOAF occurred in 7.1% of patients with prior SR. Previous valve surgery was the only significant predictor of NOAF (HR 5.86 [1.04-32.94], p<0.05). NOAF was associated with higher rehospitalization rate (62.5 vs. 34.8%, p=0.04), whereas mortality was unaffected., Conclusions: This study shows that NOAF is associated with higher rates of rehospitalization but not mortality after TAVI. Overall, patients with pre-existing AF have higher mortality., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) is often asymptomatic but nonetheless harmful. We evaluated the performance of disease-related blood biomarkers and CHA2DS2-VASc score to discriminate for PAF in patients with continuous rhythm monitoring., Methods and Results: Clinical data and blood samples were obtained from patients with dual-chamber pacemakers selected according to the absence (no&#95;AHRE) or presence of Atrial High-Rate Episodes (AHRE) >6 min in recent device history (case-control approach). We included 93 patients (n = 49 AHRE, n = 44 no&#95;AHRE). In a subgroup with high AHRE burden and confirmed PAF 15 biomarkers were evaluated (n = 19 AHRE-AF vs. n = 20 no&#95;AHRE). Significantly regulated biomarkers were then tested in all patients to distinguish no&#95;AHRE from AHRE (receiver operating characteristics analysis). Hsp27, TGFβ1, cystatin C, matrix metalloproteinases MMP-2,-3,-9, albumin, and serum uric acid were not altered in the subgroup. Tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMP) -1,-2,-4; NT-proANP, NT-proBNP, IL-6 and serum amyloid protein A were significantly different in AHRE vs. no&#95;AHRE (subgroup and whole cohort), with best discriminatory performance for TIMP-4. Biomarkers performed better than CHADS2-VASc for AHRE discrimination. Intracardial electrograms and medical history from seven AHRE patients suggested atrial tachycardia and not AF (AHRE-AT). Four of the most relevant regulated biomarkers (TIMP-4, TIMP-2, SAA, NT-proBNP) behaved similarly in AHRE-AT and AHRE-AF. NT-proBNP >150 pg/mL indicated an odds ratio of 12.9 for AHRE. Combining two biomarkers significantly improved discrimination of AHRE., Conclusion: TIMP-4, NT-proANP, NT-proBNP were strongest associated with PAF and AHRE. The discriminatory performance of CHADS2-VASc for PAF was increased by addition of selected biomarkers., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2016. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Mechanisms underlying atrial remodeling toward atrial fibrillation (AF) are incompletely understood. We induced AF in 16 pigs by 6weeks of rapid atrial pacing (RAP, 600bpm) using a custom-built, telemetrically controlled pacemaker. AF evolution was monitored three times per week telemetrically in unstressed, conscious animals. We established a dose-response relationship between RAP duration and occurrence of sustained AF >60minutes. Left atrial (LA) dilatation was present already at 2weeks of RAP. There was no evidence of left ventricular heart failure after 6weeks of RAP. As a proof-of-principle, arterial hypertension was induced in 5/16 animals by implanting desoxycorticosterone acetate (DOCA, an aldosterone-analog) subcutaneously to accelerate atrial remodeling. RAP+DOCA resulted in increased AF stability with earlier onset of sustained AF and accelerated anatomical atrial remodeling with more pronounced LA dilatation. This novel porcine model can serve to characterize effects of maladaptive stimuli or protective interventions specifically during early AF., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Mitral isthmus (MI) ablation is an effective option in patients undergoing ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). Achieving bidirectional conduction block across the MI is challenging, and predictors of MI ablation success remain incompletely understood. We sought to determine the impact of anatomical location of the ablation line on the efficacy of MI ablation., Methods and Results: A total of 40 consecutive patients (87% male; 54 ± 10 years) undergoing stepwise AF ablation were included. MI ablation was performed in sinus rhythm. MI ablation was performed from the left inferior PV to either the posterior (group 1) or the anterolateral (group 2) mitral annulus depending on randomization. The length of the MI line (measured with the 3D mapping system) and the amplitude of the EGMs at 3 positions on the MI were measured in each patient. MI block was achieved in 14/19 (74%) patients in group 1 and 15/21 (71%) patients in group 2 (P = NS). Total MI radiofrequency time (18 ± 7 min vs. 17 ± 8 min; P = NS) was similar between groups. Patients with incomplete MI block had a longer MI length (34 ± 6 mm vs. 24 ± 5 mm; P < 0.001), a higher bipolar voltage along the MI (1.75 ± 0.74 mV vs. 1.05 ± 0.69 mV; P < 0.01), and a longer history of continuous AF (19 ± 17 months vs. 10 ± 10 months; P < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, decreased length of the MI was an independent predictor of successful MI block (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.1-2.1; P < 0.05)., Conclusions: Increased length but not anatomical location of the MI predicts failure to achieve bidirectional MI block during ablation of persistent AF., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: This study aimed to determine 5-year efficacy of catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) using AF termination as a procedural end point., Methods and Results: One hundred fifty patients (57±10 years) underwent persistent AF ablation using a stepwise ablation approach (pulmonary vein isolation, electrogram-guided, and linear ablation) with the desired procedural end point being AF termination. Repeat ablation was performed for recurrent AF or atrial tachycardia. AF was terminated by ablation in 120 patients (80%). Arrhythmia-free survival rates after a single procedure were 35.3%±3.9%, 28.0%±3.7%, and 16.8%±3.2% at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. Arrhythmia-free survival rates after the last procedure (mean 2.1±1.0 procedures) were 89.7%±2.5%, 79.8%±3.4%, and 62.9%±4.5%, at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. During a median follow-up of 58 (interquartile range, 43-73) months after the last ablation procedure, 97 of 150 (64.7%) patients remained in sinus rhythm without antiarrhythmic drugs. Another 14 (9.3%) patients maintained sinus rhythm after reinitiation of antiarrhythmic drugs, and an additional 15 (10.0%) patients regressed to paroxysmal recurrences only. Failure to terminate AF during the index procedure (hazard ratio 3.831; 95% confidence interval, 2.070-7.143; P<0.001), left atrial diameter≥50 mm (hazard ratio 2.083; 95% confidence interval, 1.078-4.016; P=0.03), continuous AF duration≥18 months (hazard ratio 1.984; 95% confidence interval, 1.024-3.846; P<0.04), and structural heart disease (hazard ratio 1.874; 95% confidence interval, 1.037-3.388; P=0.04) predicted arrhythmia recurrence., Conclusions: In patients with persistent AF, an ablation strategy aiming at AF termination is associated with freedom from arrhythmia recurrence in the majority of patients over a 5-year follow-up period. Procedural AF nontermination and specific baseline factors predict long-term outcome after ablation., (© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.)