Search

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently coexists with atrial fibrillation (AF). The gold-standard test for HFpEF diagnosis remains invasive assessment of left ventricular end-diastolic pressures but noninvasive diagnostic scoring systems have been developed to aid accurate diagnosis. However, the diagnosis of HFpEF in patients with AF is more difficult because some diagnostic criteria for HFpEF may be associated with AF instead of HFpEF per se. Purpose To compare the guidelines and scoring systems for HFpEF diagnosis in patients with AF, and to indicate the most relevant clinical and echocardiographic parameters supporting the diagnosis of HFpEF in an AF cohort. Methods Consecutive patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF scheduled for catheter ablation were included. Clinical characteristics and transthoracic echocardiography examination was collected at baseline visit. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines from 2016 and 2021 as well as scoring systems (HFA-PEFF and H2FPEF scores) were used to diagnose HFpEF. In the H2FPEF score, patients with AF alone, score of 3, were assessed as group with the low risk for HFpEF (instead of intermediate risk according to the H2FPEF score), as all enrolled patients had AF. Multiple logistic regression was performed to find optimal parameters predicting HFpEF, that was defined as diagnosis of HFpEF according to all following scores: ESC guidelines from 2016 and 2021 and high risk in HF2FPEF and HF-PEFF scores. Results We analysed 325 patients (median age 65 [59-72], 36% women). Considerable differences were observed in HFpEF diagnoses when stratifying patients according to ESC 2016 and ESC 2021 guideline definitions; the percentage of HFpEF patients reduced from 55% (n=180) to 28% (n=90). The agreement of HF2PEF score relative to HFA-PEFF score was 46% (n=25/55), 54% (n=115/213) and 35% (n=20/57) of patients regarding low, intermediate and high risk for HFpEF, respectively. Overall, 5.8% of patients (n=19) had HFpEF (Figure 1). These 19 patients were older (median age 70 vs 65, p Conclusions The differences in HFpEF definition in the guidelines and various scoring systems lead to considerable difference in stratification of HFpEF in AF patients. In our population, just 5.8% of AF patients were diagnosed with HFpEF regarding ESC guidelines and high risk for HFpEF in scoring systems.

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction This study sought to examine the prognostic role of quantifying areas of interest in preinterventional cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in patients with structural heart disease (SHD) referred for ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT). Background The role of preinterventional CMR for the identification of scar areas, borderline zones and reentry channels in the ventricles has been well established. Whether the burden of dense scar or borderline tissue has a prognostic impact on the acute and the long-term ablation outcome in SHD patients is disputed. Methods and results We investigated 185 patients with SHD undergoing preinterventional CMR prior to VT-ablation. 38 patients were excluded because of poor imaging quality, leaving a cohort of 147 patients with positive late enhancement (LGE) imaging (mean age 62 years, 47% non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, mean left ventricle ejection fraction 38%, 96% with implanted ICD). The cohort was divided in ischemic (ICM) and non-ischemic (NICM) cardiomyopathy group and the results regarding burden of overall scar tissue, dense scar, borderline zone, as well as clinical and procedural characteristics, acute and long-term results of the two groups were compared. The ICM patients had more advanced NYHA stadium (p = 0.046), reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LV-EF, p Conclusion While quantification of the scar tissue and the borderline zone is feasible in ICD patients with SHD, the scar or the borderline zone burden were not predictive of the VT ablation outcome.

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Catheter ablation (CA) has been established as an effective therapeutic option to achieve rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, AF recurrence occurs in approximately 45% of the patients undergoing CA. The association between AF recurrence after CA and left atrial (LA) strain, which is a surrogate marker of LA mechanical dysfunction already appearing before the enlargement of the LA, remains less clear. Aim The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between LA function assessed by strain echocardiography and AF recurrence after CA. Methods This sub-study of ISOLATION (NCT04342312), involved consecutive patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF scheduled for first cryoballoon or radiofrequency CA. Clinical characteristics and echocardiography examination were collected at baseline visit before CA. Patients were followed for 12 months. Follow-up consisted of outpatient visits and heart rhythm monitoring (48 day Holter, 12-lead electrocardiogram, 7 day photoplethysmography-based rhythm app) at 3, 6, and 12 months. Results We analyzed 312 patients (median age 65, 36% women). More than half (52%; n=162) underwent radiofrequency CA and 84 (27 %) had AF recurrence within one year follow-up. No statistically significant differences in baseline characteristic were observed between patients with and without recurrent AF, expect higher prevalence of persistent AF prior to CA in patients with recurrence of AF (75% vs. 46%, p Conclusions LA function assessed by LA strain is associated with AF recurrence after CA, even in patients with non-dilated LA. Whether integration of results derived from systematic preprocedural LA strain analysis into patients’ selection strategies may help to identify patients profiting from CA required further study.

Background In patients with VT after myocardial infarction (MI), substrate-based ablation is superior to approaches that target clinical and tolerated VTs only. Different substrate modification strategies have been reported. However, proposed ablation targets are prone to operator interpretation (e.g. abnormal electrograms). Accordingly, ablation results can also be operator dependent. Evoked delayed potentials (EDP) are a well-defined target. Elimination of EDP has been effective to prevent VT recurrence in a retrospective, single center cohort. Aim (1)To evaluate the outcome of EDP ablation in a prospective cohort of patients included on an intention-to-treat principle and (2)to assess the outcome of EDP ablation following one uniform protocol when performed in centers without prior experience with this strategy. Methods Consecutive patients referred for post-MI VT ablation were prospectively enrolled in one center with extensive experience in EDP ablation and 5 centers with no prior experience. Substrate mapping focused on EDP identification followed a uniform protocol across all centers. In brief, all electrograms located within the infarct area were analyzed during sinus rhythm, RV pacing at a fixed rate and during the application of one short-coupled RV extra-stimulus (S2). Sites showing low-voltage, nearfield electrograms with >10ms delay or block in response to S2 were categorized as EDP and targeted for ablation. After ablation, re-mapping to confirm EDP elimination and a complete stimulation protocol (up to 4 extra's from RV and LV) were performed. Patients were followed for VT recurrence and mortality. Results 130 patients (69±10 years, 87% men, 42% anterior MI, LVEF 34% (IQR 24–43), 71% NYHA II–III, 42% on amiodarone, 52% ≥1 ICD shock, 22% with electrical storm or incessant VT) were included. The extra-stimulation protocol was systematically conducted in 127 (98%) patients and in 121 (93%), EDPs were identified. EDPs were successfully eliminated in 117/121 (97%) patients. After 23 (IQR 14–35) min of RF, 102 (78%) patients were rendered non-inducible. Median procedural duration was 212 (IQR 179–262) min. During follow-up of 14 (IQR 8–18) months, 36 (28%) patients had VT recurrence and 13 (10%) died or received a LVAD. VT-free survival was 79% (95% CI: 72–86) and 72% (95% CI: 63–80) at 6 and 12 months follow-up. Of note, VT-free survival at 12 month was not significantly different between patients undergoing the procedure in centers with and without prior experience in EDP ablation (76% (95% CI: 61–90) vs. 70% (95% CI: 59–81); P=0.269). Conclusion In a large prospective cohort of patients with post-MI VT, substrate ablation based on EDP elimination resulted in excellent long-term outcome. Of importance, procedural outcomes were similar in centers with or without experience in EDP ablation, indicating that this approach can be easily reproduced by operators previously not familiar with the technique. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.