Verma Atul, Castellano Steven, Kong Melissa H, Neuzil Petr, Szili-Torok Tamas, Spitzer Stefan G, Rillig Andreas, Reddy Vivek Y
McGill University Health Centre, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Cortex, Inc, Menlo Park, California.
Heart Rhythm. 2025 May;22(5):1170-1178. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.10.037. Epub 2024 Oct 22.
Since the Substrate and Trigger Ablation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation Trial Part II (STAR-AF II), there has been a trend toward pulmonary vein isolation (PVI)-only ablation strategies for persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF). Electrographic flow (EGF) mapping can identify active sources of atrial fibrillation (AF) and estimate the electrographic flow consistency (EGFC) of wavefront propagation through substrate, revealing functional AF mechanisms.
We sought to examine the success of a PVI-only ablation strategy for a redo PeAF/longstanding PeAF population.
Electrographic Flow-Guided Ablation in Redo Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation (FLOW-AF [NCT04473963]) prospectively enrolled patients with nonparoxysmal AF undergoing redo ablation at 4 centers. One-minute EGF recordings using 64-pole basket catheters were obtained both pre-PVI and post-PVI following a 20-minute wait and confirmation of electrical isolation of veins. Patients with EGF-identified sources were randomized 1:1 to EGF-guided source ablation vs PVI-only. Patients with no sources were not randomized and mostly received PVI only.
Study of 85 patients enrolled 24 with EGF-identified sources randomized to PVI only and 23 with no sources receiving PVI only. Of these 47 patients, those with sources (Group 2) had different clinical characteristics including older age and higher CHADS-VASc scores compared with those with no sources (Group 1). After PVI only, Group 1 had 70% (16 of 23) freedom from recurrent AF (FFAF) within 1 year vs Group 2 with 35% (8 of 23), P = .018. In addition, patients with high electrographic flow consistency (EGFC) indicative of healthy or normal substrate had 67% (10 of 15) FFAF vs 45% (14 of 31) in those with low EGFC suggestive of abnormal substrate, P = .011.
Success rates in no-sources patients receiving PVI only are better than in those with sources randomized to PVI only. For the clinically heterogenous population of patients with PeAF, the presence of EGF-identified sources matters clinically, and PVI only will not be enough for all patients.
自心房颤动基质与触发点消融试验第二部分(STAR - AF II)以来,对于持续性心房颤动(PeAF),仅进行肺静脉隔离(PVI)的消融策略呈上升趋势。心内电图血流(EGF)标测可识别心房颤动(AF)的活动源,并估计通过基质的波前传播的心内电图血流一致性(EGFC),揭示功能性AF机制。
我们试图检验仅采用PVI消融策略对再次发作的PeAF/长期PeAF患者群体的成功率。
持续性心房颤动再次消融患者的心内电图血流引导消融(FLOW - AF [NCT04473963])前瞻性纳入了在4个中心接受再次消融的非阵发性AF患者。在PVI前以及PVI后等待20分钟并确认静脉电隔离后,使用64极篮状导管进行1分钟的EGF记录。有EGF识别出的源的患者按1:1随机分为EGF引导的源消融组与仅PVI组。没有源的患者不进行随机分组,大多仅接受PVI。
对85例患者的研究纳入了24例有EGF识别出的源且随机分为仅PVI组的患者,以及23例没有源且仅接受PVI的患者。在这47例患者中,有源的患者(第2组)与无源的患者(第1组)相比,具有不同的临床特征,包括年龄更大和CHADS - VASc评分更高。仅进行PVI后,第1组在1年内有70%(23例中的16例)无房颤复发(FFAF),而第2组为35%(23例中的8例),P = .018。此外,心内电图血流一致性(EGFC)高表明基质健康或正常患者中有67%(15例中的10例)FFAF,而EGFC低提示基质异常患者中为45%(31例中的14例),P = .011。
仅接受PVI的无源患者的成功率高于随机分为仅PVI组的有源患者。对于临床上异质性的PeAF患者群体,EGF识别出的源的存在具有临床意义,仅PVI对所有患者并不足够。