| 1. |
- Glover, Benedict M, et al.
(author)
-
Impact of body mass index on the outcome of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation
- 2019
-
In: Heart. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 1355-6037 .- 1468-201X. ; 105:3, s. 244-250
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: The association between obesity and atrial fibrillation (AF) is well-established. We aimed to evaluate the impact of index body mass index (BMI) on AF recurrence at 12 months following catheter ablation using propensity-weighted analysis. In addition, periprocedural complications and fluoroscopy details were examined to assess overall safety in relationship to increasing BMI ranges.METHODS: Baseline, periprocedural and follow-up data were collected on consecutive patients scheduled for AF ablation. There were no specific exclusion criteria. Patients were categorised according to baseline BMI in order to assess the outcomes for each category.RESULTS: Among 3333 patients, 728 (21.8%) were classified as normal (BMI <25.0 kg/m2), 1537 (46.1%) as overweight (BMI 25.5-29.0 kg/m2) and 1068 (32.0%) as obese (BMI ≥30.0 kg/m2). Procedural duration and radiation dose were higher for overweight and obese patients compared with those with a normal BMI (p=0.002 and p<0.001, respectively). An index BMI ≥30 kg/m2 led to a 1.2-fold increased likelihood of experiencing recurrent AF at 12-months follow-up as compared with overweight patients (HR 1.223; 95% CI 1.047 to 1.429; p=0.011), while no significant correlation was found between overweight and normal BMI groups (HR 0.954; 95% CI 0.798 to 1.140; p=0.605) and obese versus normal BMI (HR 1.16; 95% CI 0.965 to 1.412; p=0.112).CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a baseline BMI ≥30 kg/m2 have a higher recurrence rate of AF following catheter ablation and therefore lifestyle modification to target obesity preprocedure should be considered in these patients.
|
|
| 2. |
- Arbelo, Elena, et al.
(author)
-
Contemporary management of patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation : in-hospital and 1-year follow-up findings from the ESC-EHRA atrial fibrillation ablation long-term registry
- 2017
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 38:17, s. 1303-1316
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims The ESC-EHRA Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term registry is a prospective, multinational study that aims at providing an accurate picture of contemporary real-world ablation for atrial fibrillation (AFib) and its outcome. Methods and results A total of 104 centres in 27 European countries participated and were asked to enrol 20-50 consecutive patients scheduled for first and re-do AFib ablation. Pre-procedural, procedural and 1-year follow-up data were captured on a web-based electronic case record form. Overall, 3630 patients were included, of which 3593 underwent an AFib ablation (98.9%). Median age was 59 years and 32.4% patients had lone atrial fibrillation. Pulmonary vein isolation was attempted in 98.8% of patients and achieved in 95-97%. AFib-related symptoms were present in 97%. Inhospital complications occurred in 7.8% and one patient died due to an atrioesophageal fistula. One-year follow-up was performed in 3180 (88.6%) at a median of 12.4 months (11.9-13.4) after ablation: 52.8% by clinical visit, 44.2% by telephone contact and 3.0% by contact with the general practitioner. At 12-months, the success rate with or without antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) was 73.6%. A significant portion (46%) was still on AADs. Late complications included 14 additional deaths (4 cardiac, 4 vascular, 6 other causes) and 333 (10.7%) other complications. Conclusion AFib ablation in clinical practice is mostly performed in symptomatic, relatively young and otherwise healthy patients. Overall success rate is satisfactory, but complication rate remains considerable and a significant portion of patients remain on AADs. Monitoring after ablation shows wide variations. Antithrombotic treatment after ablation shows insufficient guideline-adherence.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Grecu, Mihaela, et al.
(author)
-
In-hospital and 12-month follow-up outcome from the ESC-EORP EHRA Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term registry : sex differences
- 2020
-
In: Europace. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1099-5129 .- 1532-2092. ; 22:1, s. 66-73
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare sex differences of atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation (CA) and to analyse the opportunities for improved outcomes.METHODS AND RESULTS: All data were collected from the Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term registry, a prospective, multinational study conducted by the ESC-EORP European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) under the EURObservational Research Programme (ESC-EORP). A total of 104 centres in 27 European countries participated. Of 3593 included patients, 1146 (31.9%) were female. Female patients were older (61.0 vs. 56.4 years; P < 0.001), had more comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, and obesity), more episodes of arrhythmias per month (6.9 vs. 6.2; P < 0.001), and a higher average EHRA score (2.6 vs. 2.4; P < 0.001). The duration of the procedure was shorter in females (160.1 min vs. 167.9 min; P < 0.001), irrespective of additional ablation lesions added to pulmonary vein isolation. Overall cardiovascular complications were more frequent in women than in men (5.7% vs. 3.4%; P < 0.001). Furthermore, cardiac perforations (3.8% vs. 1.3%; P = 0.011) and neurological complications (2.2% vs. 0.3%; P = 0.004) were found in females in less experienced centres than in experienced ones. On a final note, at 12 months, AF recurrence rate was similar in females and males (34.4% vs. 34.2%; P = 0.897), but more females were still on antiarrhythmic drugs (50.6% vs. 44.1%; P < 0.001) when compared with men.CONCLUSION: Females underwent CA procedures for AF less frequently than males throughout Europe, despite more recurrent symptoms. With the same success rate, severe acute complications remained considerable in females, especially in less experienced centres.
|
|
| 5. |
- Mörtsell, David, et al.
(author)
-
Cryoballoon vs. radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation : a study of outcome and safety based on the ESC-EHRA atrial fibrillation ablation long-term registry and the Swedish catheter ablation registry
- 2019
-
In: Europace. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1099-5129 .- 1532-2092. ; 21:4, s. 581-589
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), the standard for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, is most commonly applied with radiofrequency (RF) energy, although cryoballoon technology (CRYO) has gained widespread use. The aim was to compare the second-generation cryoballoon and the irrigated RF energy regarding outcomes and safety.Methods and results: Of 4657 patients undergoing their first AF ablation, 982 with CRYO and 3675 with RF energy were included from the Swedish catheter ablation registry and the Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term registry of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the European Society of Cardiology. The primary endpoint was repeat AF ablation. The major secondary endpoints included procedural duration, tachyarrhythmia recurrence, and complication rate. The re-ablation rate after 12 months was significantly lower in the CRYO vs. the RF group, 7.8% vs. 11%, P=0.005, while freedom from arrhythmia recurrence (30 s duration) did not differ between the groups, 70.2 % vs. 68.2%, P=0.44. The result was not influenced by AF type and lesion sets applied. In the Cox regression analysis, paroxysmal AF had significantly lower risk for re-ablation with CRYO, hazard ratio 0.56 (P=0.041). Procedural duration was significantly shorter with CRYO than RF, (meanSD) 133.6 +/- 45.2 min vs. 174.6 +/- 58.2 min, P<0.001. Complication rates were similar; 53/982 (5.4%) vs. 191/3675 (5.2%), CRYO vs. RF, P=0.806.Conclusion: The lower re-ablation rates and shorter procedure times observed with the cryoballoon as compared to RF ablation may have important clinical implications when choosing AF ablation technique despite recognized limitations with registries.
|
|
| 6. |
- Stabile, Giuseppe, et al.
(author)
-
Atrial fibrillation history impact on catheter ablation outcome : Findings from the ESC-EHRA atrial fibrillation ablation long-term registry
- 2019
-
In: Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. - : Wiley. - 0147-8389 .- 1540-8159. ; 42:3, s. 313-320
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) promotes atrial remodeling that in turn promote AF perpetuation. The aim of our study was to investigate the impact of AF history length on one-year outcome of AF catheter ablation in a cohort of patients enrolled in the Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Registry.METHODS: We described the real-life clinical epidemiology, therapeutic strategies and the short- and mid-term outcomes of 1948 patients (71.9% with paroxysmal AF) undergoing AF ablation procedures, stratified according to AF history duration (< 2 years or ≥ 2 years).RESULTS: The mean AF history duration was 46,2±57,4 months, 592 patients had an AF history duration < 2 years (mean 10,2±5,9 months), and 1356 patients ≥ 2 years (mean 75,5±63,5 months) (P < 0.001). Patients with AF history duration < 2 years were younger, had a lower incidence of hypertension, coronary artery disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and had a lower CHA2 DS2 -VaSc Score. At one year, the logrank test showed a lower incidence of AF recurrence in patients with AF history duration < 2 years (28.9%) than in patients with AF history duration ≥ 2 years (34.0%) (P = 0.037). AF history duration ≥ 2 years, overall ablation procedure duration, hypertension and chronic kidney disease were all predictors of recurrences after the blanking period.CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter registry, performing catheter ablation in patients with an AF history ≥ 2 years was associated with higher rates of AF recurrences at one year. Since cumulative time in AF in not necessarily equivalent to AF history, its role remains to be clarified.
|
|
| 7. |
- Trines, Serge A., et al.
(author)
-
Influence of risk factors in the ESC-EHRA EORP atrial fibrillation ablation long-term registry
- 2019
-
In: Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. - : Wiley. - 0147-8389 .- 1540-8159. ; 42:10, s. 1365-1373
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The influence of risk factors on atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation recurrence is increasingly recognized. We present a sub-analysis of the European Society of Cardiology-European Heart Rhythm Association-European Society of Cardiology AF ablation long-term registry on the effect of traditional risk factors for AF on postablation recurrence, reablation, and complications using real-world data.Methods: Risk factors for AF were defined as body mass index >= 27 kg/m(2), hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, alcohol >= 2 units/day, sleep apnea, smoking, no/occasional sports activity, moderate/severe mitral or aortic valve disease, any cardiomyopathy, peripheral vascular disease, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, coronary artery disease/infarction, and previous pacemaker/defibrillator implant. Patients were divided in two groups with >= 1 or without risk factors. Primary outcomes were arrhythmia recurrence after blanking period, reablation, and adverse events or death. Differences between the groups and the influence of individual risk factors were analyzed using multivariate Cox regression.Results: Three thousand sixty nine patients were included; 217 patients were without risk factors. Risk factor patients were older (58.4 vs 54.1 years), more often female (32% vs 19.8%) and had more often persistent AF (27.2% vs 23.5%). In a multivariate analysis, patients without risk factors had a hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI 0.49-0.99) for recurrence compared to risk factor patients. The multivariate hazard ratios for reablation or adverse events/death were not different between the two groups. Hypertension and body mass index were univariate predictors of recurrence.Conclusions: Patients with >= 1 risk factor had a 30% higher risk for arrhythmia recurrence after ablation, but no differences in risk for repeat ablations and adverse events or death.
|
|
