Biomarkers of myocardial injury with different energy sources for atrial fibrillation catheter ablation

Background: Our study aims to compare acute myocardial injury biomarker rise after atrial fibrillation ablation performed with different technologies.Methods and Results: One hundred and ten patients were treated with pulmonary vein isolation with 4 different technologies: open-irrigated tip radiofrequency (RF) catheter in35 patients (Group A), cryoballoon in 35 patients (Group B), visually guided laser balloon in 20 patients (Group C), open-irrigated tip RF catheter with contact-force-sensing technology in 20 patients (Group D). Post-procedure samples of cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and creatinine kinase-MB (CK-MB) were collected at 19 ± 3 h and 43 ± 3 h after ablation. At the first postprocedural sample, cTnI and CK-MB levels were found elevated in all 110 patients with a median value of 2.11 ng/mL and 8.95 ng/mL, respectively. Group B showed cTnI levels increased (median 5.96 ng/mL) compared to other groups (median Group A: 1.72 ng/mL, Group C: 1.54 ng/mL, Group D: 2.0 ng/mL; p < 0.001). Also CK-MB levels resulted higher in cryoablation (median 26.4 ng/mL) compared to other groups (median Group A: 6.40 ng/mL, Group C: 7.15 ng/mL, Group D: 6.50 ng/mL; p < 0.001). No significant association was observed between biomarker levels and recurrences of atrial fibrillation after a mean follow-up of 369 ± 196 days.Conclusions: Highest markers for myocardial injury were observed in the cryoballoon group. It is possible that a longer delivery energy duration and other factors affecting lesion size resulted in higher amount of cardiac injury in cryoablation. The higher levels of cardiac biomarkers did not translate into a better outcome and its physiologic significance is unknown.

471 Arrhythmia-free survival in early-persistent atrial fibrillation patients undergoing radiofrequency catheter ablation

Abstract Aims Despite advances in success rate of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) ablation, outcomes of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) in patients with persistent AF are highly variable. Early persistent AF (EPsAF) is defined as AF that is sustained beyond 7 days but is less than 3 months in duration. Arrhythmia-free survival data after RFCA in this specific population are still limited. We sought to report the outcomes of RFCA in the subgroup of patients with EPsAF, compared to those with PAF and with 'late' persistent AF (LPsAF) lasting between 3 and 12 months. Methods and results Data from 1143 consecutive AF patients receiving their first RFCA were prospectively collected. Patients with EPsAF (n = 190) were compared with PAF (n = 531) and LPsAF (n = 422) patients. All patients received pulmonary vein antrum isolation + posterior wall and sustained non-pulmonary vein (PV) trigger ablation. Non-sustained non-PV triggers were ablated based on operator discretion. Non-PV triggers were defined as sites of firing leading to sustained (>30 s) or non-sustained arrhythmias (<30 s, including premature atrial contractions ≥10 beats/min) with earliest activation outside the PVs. Mean age of the population was 64 ± 11 years. Female patients were more in PAF group (39%) compared to EPsAF (26%) and LPsAF (28%) (P < 0.001). There was no difference in other clinical characteristics among populations. Non-PV triggers were detected more in EPsAF [127 (66.8%)], and LPsAF [296 (70.1%)] patients compared to PAF [185 (34.8%)] (P < 0.001).One-year arrhythmia-free survival rate after a single procedure was 75.0% (398), 74.2% (141), and 64.5% (272) in PAF, EPsAF, and LPsAF, respectively. Success rate was significantly higher in PAF {[HR: 0.67 (0.53, 0.84), P = 0.001] and EPsAF [HR: 0.67 (0.49, 0.93)], P = 0.015} compared to LPsAF. Conclusions In patients with EPsAF, RFCA may result in significantly better freedom from atrial arrhythmias, compared to LPsAF. In this cohort, ablation might be reasonable as first line approach to improve outcomes and prevent AF progression

Long-term Outcome of Pulmonary Vein Isolation Versus Amiodarone Therapy in Patients with Coexistent Persistent AF and Congestive Heart Failure

Although pharmacological rhythm control of AF in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) does not seem to provide any benefit over rate control, catheter ablation of AF has been shown to improve clinical outcomes. These results can be explained with higher success rates of catheter ablation in restoring and maintaining sinus rhythm compared with antiarrhythmic drugs. In addition, pharmacotherapy is not void of side-effects, which are thought to offset its potential antiarrhythmic benefits. Therefore, efforts should be made towards optimisation of ablation techniques for AF in patients with HFrEF