Management of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Specific Considerations for the Old Age

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the commonest of all sustained arrhythmias, and most of the patients seeking medical therapy are in the elderly age group. The management of these patients is particularly difficult due to associated comorbidities. Hypertension, congestive heart failure, left ventricular hypertrophy, and coronary artery disease are often present in the elderly patient population, and therefore, antiarrhythmic drugs often fail due to side effects, proarrhythmia, or poor rhythm control. Recently, radiofrequency catheter ablation has been widely performed as an efficient therapy for recurrent, drug-refractory AF. Nevertheless, patients at old age were underrepresented in prior AF ablation trials, and the current guidelines for catheter ablation of AF recommend a noninvasive approach in the elderly patient group due to the lack of clinical data supporting ablation therapy. However, study results of our group and others are suggesting that catheter ablation is a safe and effective treatment for patients over the age of 65 years with symptomatic, drug-refractory AF, and therefore, patients should not be precluded from catheter ablation only on the basis of age. This paper discusses the pharmacological (rhythm control, rate control, and anticoagulation) and catheter management of AF in the elderly population

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: an update

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is now an important therapeutic modality for patients with AF. There is considerable evidence available from several prospective randomized trials demonstrating that catheter ablation of AF is superior to antiarrhythmic drug therapy in controlling AF and that AF ablation improves quality of life substantially. This is especially true for patients with paroxysmal AF without other severe comorbidities. Catheter ablation is indicated for treatment of patients with symptomatic AF in whom one or more attempts at class 1 or 3 antiarrhythmic drug therapy have failed. Although current guidelines state that is appropriate to perform catheter ablation as a first-line therapy in selected patients, in our clinical practice this is rare. This reflects a number of important realities concerning the field of AF ablation. Catheter ablation of AF is a challenging and complex procedure, which is not free of the risk of potentially life-threatening complications, such as an atrio-oesophageal fistula, stroke, and cardiac tamponade. Although these major complications are rare and their rate is falling, they must be considered by both patients and physicians. The progress made and the new developments on the horizon in the field of AF catheter ablation are remarkable. When radiofrequency catheter ablation was first introduced in the late 1980s, few would have predicted that catheter ablation of AF would emerge as the most commonly performed ablation procedure in most major hospital

Ablation of atrial fibrillation after the retirement age: considerations on safety and outcome

Background: Although the incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) progressively increases with age, the vast majority of AF ablation is done in middle-aged patients. We evaluated the feasibility and safety of catheter ablation in patients older than 65years of age with paroxysmal and persistent AF. Methods: Out of a total of 230 consecutive AF ablation procedures, 45 patients were older than 65years of age and underwent 53 procedures. The ablation strategy consisted of wide-area circumferential lines around both ipsilateral pulmonary veins using a three-dimensional mapping system. Results: The mean age was 69 ± 3.5years (35 males). The mean duration for AF was 8.7 ± 6.5years. Thirty-nine had paroxysmal and six persistent AF despite use of 1.38 ± 0.77 antiarrhythmic drugs. All patients had a structurally normal heart. Eleven had systemic hypertension. Mean procedure time was 187 ± 33min. Acute procedural success rate with abolition of all pulmonary vein potentials was achieved in all patients. Pericardial tamponade requiring percutaneous drainage occurred in one (1.9%) patient. There were no cardioembolic events. Among the 43 patients whose clinical outcome was assessed at 6months, 34 (79%) had a significant reduction (>90%) of the total symptomatic AF burden, compared to pre-ablation, with a complete lack of symptomatic AF in 32 (74%) patients. The success rate was higher for patients with paroxysmal versus persistent AF (81 vs. 67%). Six patients (11%) underwent repeat procedures. Conclusions: Catheter ablation is a safe and effective treatment for patients over the age of 65years with symptomatic, drug-refractory AF. Therefore, patients should not be excluded from undergoing AF catheter ablation on the basis of age alon

Feasibility of zero or near zero fluoroscopy during catheter ablation procedures

Background: Awareness of risks associated with radiation exposure to patients and medical staff has significantly increased. It has been reported before that the use of advanced three-dimensional electroanatomical mapping (EAM) system significantly reduces fluoroscopy time, however this study aimed for zero or near zero fluoroscopy ablation to assess its feasibility and safety in ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) and other tachyarrhythmias in a “real world” experience of a single tertiary care center.  Methods: This was a single-center study where ablation procedures were attempted without fluoroscopy in 34 consecutive patients with different tachyarrhythmias under the support of EAM system. When transseptal puncture (TSP) was needed, it was attempted under the guidance of intracardiac echocardiography (ICE). Results: Among 34 patients consecutively enrolled in this study, 28 (82.4%) patients were referred for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of AF, 3 (8.8%) patients for ablation of right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) ventricular extrasystole (VES), 1 (2.9%) patient for ablation of atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT), 2 (5.9%) patients for typical atrial flutter ablation. In 21 (62%) patients the en- tire procedure was carried out without the use of fluoroscopy. Among 28 AF patients, 15 (54%) patients underwent ablation without the use of fluoroscopy and among these 15 patients, 10 (67%) patients required TSP under ICE guidance while 5 (33%) patients the catheters were introduced to left atrium through a patent foramen ovale. In 13 AF patients, fluoroscopy was only required for double TSP. The total procedure time of AF ablation was 130 ± 50 min. All patients referred for atrial flutter, AVNRT, and VES of the RVOT ablation did not require any fluoroscopy. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the feasibility of zero or near zero fluoroscopy procedure including TSP with the support of EAM and ICE guidance in a “real world” experience of a single tertiary care center. When fluoroscopy was required, it was limited to TSP hence keeping the radiation dose very low

Systematic, early rhythm control strategy for atrial fibrillation in patients with or without symptoms:the EAST-AFNET 4 trial

AIMS: Clinical practice guidelines restrict rhythm control therapy to patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). The EAST-AFNET 4 trial demonstrated that early, systematic rhythm control improves clinical outcomes compared to symptom-directed rhythm control. METHODS AND RESULTS: This prespecified EAST-AFNET 4 analysis compared the effect of early rhythm control therapy in asymptomatic patients (EHRA score I) to symptomatic patients. Primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, stroke, or hospitalization with worsening of heart failure or acute coronary syndrome, analyzed in a time-to-event analysis. At baseline, 801/2633 (30.4%) patients were asymptomatic [mean age 71.3 years, 37.5% women, mean CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score 3.4, 169/801 (21.1%) heart failure]. Asymptomatic patients randomized to early rhythm control (395/801) received similar rhythm control therapies compared to symptomatic patients [e.g. AF ablation at 24 months: 75/395 (19.0%) in asymptomatic; 176/910 (19.3%) symptomatic patients, P = 0.672]. Anticoagulation and treatment of concomitant cardiovascular conditions was not different between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. The primary outcome occurred in 79/395 asymptomatic patients randomized to early rhythm control and in 97/406 patients randomized to usual care (hazard ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval [0.6; 1.03]), almost identical to symptomatic patients. At 24 months follow-up, change in symptom status was not different between randomized groups (P = 0.19). CONCLUSION: The clinical benefit of early, systematic rhythm control was not different between asymptomatic and symptomatic patients in EAST-AFNET 4. These results call for a shared decision discussing the benefits of rhythm control therapy in all patients with recently diagnosed AF and concomitant cardiovascular conditions (EAST-AFNET 4; ISRCTN04708680; NCT01288352; EudraCT2010-021258-20)

A roadmap to improve the quality of atrial fibrillation management:proceedings from the fifth Atrial Fibrillation Network/European Heart Rhythm Association consensus conference

At least 30 million people worldwide carry a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (AF), and many more suffer from undiagnosed, subclinical, or 'silent' AF. Atrial fibrillation-related cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, including cardiovascular deaths, heart failure, stroke, and hospitalizations, remain unacceptably high, even when evidence-based therapies such as anticoagulation and rate control are used. Furthermore, it is still necessary to define how best to prevent AF, largely due to a lack of clinical measures that would allow identification of treatable causes of AF in any given patient. Hence, there are important unmet clinical and research needs in the evaluation and management of AF patients. The ensuing needs and opportunities for improving the quality of AF care were discussed during the fifth Atrial Fibrillation Network/European Heart Rhythm Association consensus conference in Nice, France, on 22 and 23 January 2015. Here, we report the outcome of this conference, with a focus on (i) learning from our 'neighbours' to improve AF care, (ii) patient-centred approaches to AF management, (iii) structured care of AF patients, (iv) improving the quality of AF treatment, and (v) personalization of AF management. This report ends with a list of priorities for research in AF patients