Search

Introduction The VICTORY AF Study was designed to evaluate the risk of the procedure and/or device-related strokes in patients with PersAF on warfarin undergoing ablation with a phased radiofrequency (RF) system. Methods The VICTORY AF trial was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, investigational study. PersAF patients on vitamin K antagonism without major structural heart disease or history of stroke/transient ischemic attack undergoing phased RF ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of the procedure and/or device-related stroke within 30 days of the ablation by a board-certified neurologist's assessment. The secondary outcomes were an acute procedural success, 6 months effectiveness (defined as the reduction in AF/atrial flutter episodes lasting ≥10 minutes by 48-hour Holter 6 months postablation) and the number of patients with pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis. Results A total of 129 (108 PersAF, 21 long-standing PersAF) patients were treated (mean age: 60.6 ± 7.7; 79.8% male, 54.3% CHA2Ds2-VASc score ≥ 2). Two nondisabling strokes were reported (1.6%); one before discharge and the second diagnosed at the 30-day visit. Due to slow enrollment, the study was terminated before reaching the 95% one-sided upper confidence boundary for stroke incidence. Acute procedural success was 93.8%, and at 6 months, 72.8% of patients demonstrated ≥90% reduction in AF burden, 78.9% were off all antiarrhythmic drugs. There were no patients with PV stenosis of greater than 70%. Conclusions VICTORY AF demonstrated a 1.6% incidence of stroke in PersAF undergoing ablation with a phased RF system which did not meet statistical confidence due to poor enrollment. The secondary outcomes suggest comparable efficacy to phased RF in the tailored treatment of permanent AF trial. Rigorous clinical evaluation of the stroke risk of new AF ablation technologies as well as restriction to Vitamin K antagonist anticoagulation appears to be unachievable goals in a clinical multicenter IDE trial of AF ablation in the current era.

Aims The GOLD AF Registry has been designed to prospectively assess the population, indications, and outcomes using second-generation phased radiofrequency (RF) ablation (pulmonary vein ablation catheter GOLD) in a global examination of standard-of-care use for the treatment of paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and results GOLD AF (NCT02433613) is a prospective, observational, multi-centre registry designed to characterize efficacy and safety of phased RF ablation in patients with AF. The primary endpoint was freedom from AF recurrence at 12-month follow-up after a 90-day blanking period. Ancillary objectives include safety, procedural efficiency, and quality of life (QoL). The QoL assessment using the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-Life (AFEQT) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) Score of AF-related symptoms was collected at baseline and 12 months. In total, 1054 patients were included in this analysis (age 60.6, 67.6% male, 26.5% PersAF). Kaplan–Meier estimate of freedom from AF recurrence was 77.7% at 12 months. Peri-procedural device or procedure-related complications were observed in 26 (2.5%) patients, with a low stroke rate of 0.3%. One-year post-ablation, the EHRA AF Symptom score decreased in 68% of patients. The AFEQT score improvement was observed in 88.4% and 90.4% of patients who completed the questionnaire in-person or interviewed by phone at 12 month follow-up, respectively. Conclusion Phased RF ablation for the treatment of paroxysmal and persistent AF demonstrated a 77.7% freedom from AF recurrence at 12 months in addition to a significant reduction in arrhythmia symptoms and clinically meaningful improved QoL. Low peri-procedural complication rate of

Since the evaluation of the cryoballoon in the Sustained Treatment Of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation trial, more than 350,000 patients with atrial fibrillation have been treated. Several studies have reported improved outcomes using the second-generation cryoballoon, and recent publications have evaluated modifications, refinements, and improvements in procedural techniques. Here, peer-reviewed articles published since the first cryoballoon best practices review were summarized against the technical practices of physicians with a high level of experience with the cryoballoon (average ≥6 years of experience in ≥900 cases). This summary includes a comprehensive literature review along with practical usage guidance from physicians using the cryoballoon to facilitate safe, efficient, and effective outcomes for patients with atrial fibrillation.

Background There are no recommendations on the optimal dosing for cryoablation of atrial fibrillation (Cryo-AF). Objective The purpose of this study was to develop and prospectively test a Cryo-AF dosing protocol guided exclusively by time-to-pulmonary vein (PV) isolation (TT-PVI) in patients undergoing a first-time Cryo-AF. Methods In this multicenter study, we examined the acute/long-term safety/efficacy of Cryo-AF using the proposed dosing algorithm (Cryo-AFDosing; n=355) against a conventional, nonstandardized approach (Cryo-AFConventional; n=400) in a nonrandomized fashion. Results Acute PV isolation was achieved in 98.9% of patients in Cryo-AFDosing (TT-PVI = 48 ± 16 seconds) vs 97.2% in Cryo-AFConventional (P = .18). Cryo-AFDosing was associated with shorter (149 ± 34 seconds vs 226 ± 46 seconds; P Conclusion A novel Cryo-AF dosing algorithm guided by TT-PVI can help individualize the ablation strategy and yield improved procedural endpoints and efficiency as compared to a conventional, nonstandardized approach.

Background Outcomes of cryoballoon ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) have been reported in the Western countries but not in Japan. The CRYO-Japan PMS study was a single-arm, observational, multicenter, prospective study of the 2nd-generation cryoballoon Arctic Front Advance(TM). We evaluated device- and procedure-related complications and clinical outcomes at 6 months. Methods and results The 616 patients (male, 72%; mean age, 63±11 years) were enrolled from 33 Japanese hospitals. Of all patients, 610 had PAF, and procedural data were analyzed in 607. A subset of 328 patients was followed for 6 months for the primary efficacy analysis. AF recurrence outside the 3-month blanking period or repeat ablation was considered treatment failure. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 606/607 patients (99.8%); 1 patient (0.3%) had a repeat ablation during the blanking period. Freedom from AF at 6 months was 88.4% (95% CI: 84.1-91.6%). Device- and/or procedure-related adverse events included phrenic nerve injury unresolved at hospital discharge in 9/616 patients (1.5%), which resolved within 6 months in 7, pericardial effusion in 5/616 (0.8%), and tamponade in 4/616 (0.6%). One non-device-related death from pneumonia was reported 6 days post-procedure. Conclusions Cryoballoon ablation is safe and effective for Japanese PAF patients, with 88.4% AF freedom at 6 months post-ablation. (Circ J 2016; 80: 1744-1749).

Background This study sought to assess payer costs following cryoballoon or radiofrequency current ( RFC ) catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in the randomized FIRE AND ICE trial. Methods and Results A trial period analysis of healthcare costs evaluated the impact of ablation modality (cryoballoon versus RFC ) on differences in resource use and associated payer costs. Analyses were based on repeat interventions, rehospitalizations, and cardioversions during the trial, with unit costs based on 3 national healthcare systems (Germany [€], the United Kingdom [£], and the United States [ $ ]). Total payer costs were calculated by applying standard unit costs to hospital stays, using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision diagnoses and procedure codes that were mapped to country‐specific diagnosis‐related groups. Patients (N=750) randomized 1:1 to cryoballoon (n=374) or RFC (n=376) ablation were followed for a mean of 1.5 years. Resource use was lower in the cryoballoon than the RFC group (205 hospitalizations and/or interventions in 122 patients versus 268 events in 154 patients). The cost differences per patient in mean total payer costs during follow‐up were €640, £364, and $ 925 in favor of cryoballoon ablation ( P =0.012, 0.013, and 0.016, respectively). This resulted in trial period total cost savings of €245 000, £140 000, and $ 355 000. Conclusions When compared with RFC ablation, cryoballoon ablation was associated with a reduction in resource use and payer costs. In all 3 national healthcare systems analyzed, this reduction resulted in substantial trial period cost savings, primarily attributable to fewer repeat ablations and a reduction in cardiovascular rehospitalizations with cryoballoon ablation. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Identifier: NCT01490814.

Background Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces morbidity and mortality in appropriately selected patients with heart failure. Optimal left ventricular (LV) lead placement is useful in enhancing response from CRT. Three significant obstacles to LV lead placement are patient-specific variations in coronary venous anatomy, phrenic nerve stimulation, and a significant rate of LV lead dislodgement or microdislodgement. Objective The primary objective of this study was to determine the safety and effectiveness of the Medtronic StarFix active fixation LV lead. Secondary objectives evaluated implant success, lead placement and procedure time, lead handling and lobe deployment, additional electrical performance, and all adverse events reported in the study. Methods There were 441 patients enrolled in this multicenter study. Standard cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) inclusion criteria were used. Patients were followed up for a mean of 23 months. Implant data, success with CRT, LV lead performance, clinical outcomes, and experience with LV lead revisions were prospectively evaluated. Results The mean LV stimulation threshold at implant was 1.3 ± 1 volts and was stable over time. Sensing was also excellent. In 96.3% of the implantations in this study, the physician was able to place the lead in a nonanterior position. Extracardiac (phrenic nerve) stimulation required invasive intervention in 11 subjects (2.5%). Only 3 dislodgements (0.7%) were observed. Two occurred in the first 5 implants and were attributed to inadequate engagement of the venous subbranch. Conclusion The Medtronic 4195 is safe and highly efficacious. It affords the physician more choices in lead placement location and has a remarkably low dislodgement rate.

BackgroundLimited data exist on cryoablation of atrial fibrillation (Cryo-AF) using the newly available third-generation (Arctic Front Advance-Short Tip [AFA-ST]) cryoballoon.ObjectiveIn this multicenter study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of Cryo-AF using the AFA-ST vs the second-generation (Arctic Front Advance [AFA]) cryoballoon.MethodsWe examined the procedural safety and efficacy and the short- and long-term clinical outcomes associated with a first-time Cryo-AF performed in 355 consecutive patients (254/355 [72%] with paroxysmal AF), using either the AFA-ST (n = 102) or the AFA (n = 253) cryoballoon catheters.ResultsAcute isolation was achieved in 99.6% of all pulmonary veins (PVs) (AFA-ST: 100% vs AFA: 99.4%; P = .920). Time to pulmonary vein isolation was recorded in 89.2% of PVs using AFA-ST vs 60.2% using AFA (P < .001). PVs targeted using AFA-ST required fewer applications (1.6 ± 0.8 vs 1.7 ± 0.8; P = .023), whereas there were no differences in the balloon nadir temperature (AFA-ST: −47.0°C ± 7.3°C vs AFA: −47.5°C ± 7.8°C; P = .120) or thaw time (AFA-ST: 41 ± 24 seconds vs AFA: 44 ± 28 seconds; P = .056). However, AFA-ST was associated with shorter left atrial dwell time (43 ± 5 minutes vs 53 ± 16 minutes; P < .001) and procedure time (71 ± 11 minutes vs 89 ± 25 minutes; P < .001). Furthermore, Cryo-AF using AFA-ST was completed more frequently by “single-shot” PV ablation (27.4% vs 20.2%; P = .031). Persistent phrenic nerve palsy (AFA-ST: 0% vs AFA: 0.8%; P = .507) and procedure-related adverse events (AFA-ST: 1.0% vs AFA: 1.6%; P = .554) were similar, as was the freedom from recurrent atrial arrhythmias at 10 months of follow-up (AFA-ST: 81.8% vs AFA: 79.9%; P = .658).ConclusionCryo-AF using the AFA-ST cryoballoon offers an enhanced ability to assess time to pulmonary vein isolation, allowing for fewer cryoapplications and shorter left atrial dwell time and procedure time. Consequently, this allowed for procedural completion more frequently using a “single-shot” PV ablation with equivalent safety and efficacy.