Left atrial appendage size is a marker of atrial fibrillation recurrence after radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation

Introduction There are no consistently confirmed predictors of atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after catheter ablation. Therefore, we aimed to study whether left atrial appendage volume (LAAV) and function influence the long-term recurrence of AF after catheter ablation, depending on AF type.Methods AF patients who underwent point-by-point radiofrequency catheter ablation after cardiac computed tomography (CT) were included in this analysis. LAAV and LAA orifice area were measured by CT. Uni- and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models were performed to determine the predictors of AF recurrence.Results In total, 561 AF patients (61.9 +/- 10.2 years, 34.9% females) were included in the study. Recurrence of AF was detected in 40.8% of the cases (34.6% in patients with paroxysmal and 53.5% in those with persistent AF) with a median recurrence-free time of 22.7 (9.3-43.1) months. Patients with persistent AF had significantly higher body surface area-indexed LAV, LAAV, and LAA orifice area and lower LAA flow velocity, than those with paroxysmal AF. After adjustment left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) Conclusion The current study demonstrates that beyond left ventricular systolic dysfunction, LAA enlargement is associated with higher rate of AF recurrence after catheter ablation in persistent AF, but not in patients with paroxysmal AF.</p

CT or Invasive Coronary Angiography in Stable Chest Pain.

Background: In the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), computed tomography (CT) is an accurate, noninvasive alternative to invasive coronary angiography (ICA). However, the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA in the management of CAD to reduce the frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events is uncertain. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, randomized trial comparing CT with ICA as initial diagnostic imaging strategies for guiding the treatment of patients with stable chest pain who had an intermediate pretest probability of obstructive CAD and were referred for ICA at one of 26 European centers. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) over 3.5 years. Key secondary outcomes were procedure-related complications and angina pectoris. Results: Among 3561 patients (56.2% of whom were women), follow-up was complete for 3523 (98.9%). Major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 38 of 1808 patients (2.1%) in the CT group and in 52 of 1753 (3.0%) in the ICA group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 1.07; P = 0.10). Major procedure-related complications occurred in 9 patients (0.5%) in the CT group and in 33 (1.9%) in the ICA group (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.55). Angina during the final 4 weeks of follow-up was reported in 8.8% of the patients in the CT group and in 7.5% of those in the ICA group (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.48). Conclusions: Among patients referred for ICA because of stable chest pain and intermediate pretest probability of CAD, the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was similar in the CT group and the ICA group. The frequency of major procedure-related complications was lower with an initial CT strategy. (Funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program and others; DISCHARGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02400229.)