Back to Search Start Over

DR-FLASH Score Is Useful for Identifying Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Who Require Extensive Catheter Ablation Procedures

Authors :
Taiki Sato
Yohei Sotomi
Shungo Hikoso
Daisaku Nakatani
Hiroya Mizuno
Katsuki Okada
Tomoharu Dohi
Tetsuhisa Kitamura
Akihiro Sunaga
Hirota Kida
Bolrathanak Oeun
Yasuyuki Egami
Tetsuya Watanabe
Hitoshi Minamiguchi
Miwa Miyoshi
Nobuaki Tanaka
Takafumi Oka
Masato Okada
Takashi Kanda
Yasuhiro Matsuda
Masato Kawasaki
Masaharu Masuda
Koichi Inoue
Yasushi Sakata
Toshiaki Mano
Masatake Fukunami
Takahisa Yamada
Yoshio Furukawa
Shinji Hasegawa
Yoshiharu Higuchi
Nobuhiko Makino
Akio Hirata
Jun Tanouchi
Masami Nishino
Yasuharu Matsunaga
Yasushi Matsumura
Toshihiro Takeda
Tomoaki Nakano
Kentaro Ozu
Shinichiro Suna
Koji Tanaka
Tomoko Minamisaka
Shiro Hoshida
Source :
Journal of the American Heart Association. 11(16)
Publication Year :
2022

Abstract

Background Modification of arrhythmogenic substrates with extensive ablation comprising linear and/or complex fractional atrial electrogram ablation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI‐plus) can theoretically reduce the recurrence of atrial fibrillation. The DR‐FLASH score (score based on diabetes mellitus, renal dysfunction, persistent form of atrial fibrillation, left atrialdiameter >45 mm, age >65 years, female sex, and hypertension) is reportedly useful for identifying patients with arrhythmogenic substrates. We hypothesized that, in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, the DR‐FLASH score can be used to classify patients into those who require PVI‐plus and those for whom a PVI‐only strategy is sufficient. Methods and Results This study is a post hoc subanalysis of the a multicenter, randomized controlled, noninferiority trial investigating efficacy and safety of pulmonary vein isolation alone for recurrence prevention compared with extensive ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (EARNEST‐PVI trial). This analysis focuses on the relationship between DR‐FLASH score and the efficacy of different ablation strategies. We divided the population into 2 groups based on a DR‐FLASH score of 3 points. A total of 469 patients were analyzed. Among those with a DR‐FLASH score >3 (N=279), the event rate of atrial arrhythmia recurrence was significantly lower in the PVI‐plus arm than in the PVI‐only arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45 [95% CI, 0.28–0.72]; P P =0.795). There was significant interaction between patients with a DR‐FLASH score >3 and DR‐FLASH score ≤3 ( P value for interaction=0.020). Conclusions The DR‐FLASH score is a useful tool for deciding the catheter ablation strategy for patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03514693.

Details

ISSN :
20479980
Volume :
11
Issue :
16
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Journal of the American Heart Association
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....102060ee64fddcc75b6f4049cc1eedaa