Biomarkers as predictors of recurrence of atrial fibrillation post ablation: an updated and expanded systematic review and meta-analysis

Background A high proportion of patients undergoing catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) experience recurrence of arrhythmia. This meta-analysis aims to identify pre-ablation serum biomarker(s) associated with arrhythmia recurrence to improve patient selection before CA. Methods A systematic approach following PRISMA reporting guidelines was utilised in libraries (Pubmed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus) and supplemented by scanning through bibliographies of articles. Biomarker levels were compared using a random-effects model and presented as odds ratio (OR). Heterogeneity was examined by meta-regression and subgroup analysis. Results In total, 73 studies were identified after inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Nine out of 22 biomarkers showed association with recurrence of AF after CA. High levels of N-Terminal-pro-B-type-Natriuretic Peptide [OR (95% CI), 3.11 (1.80–5.36)], B-type Natriuretic Peptide [BNP, 2.91 (1.74–4.88)], high-sensitivity C-Reactive Protein [2.04 (1.28–3.23)], Carboxy-terminal telopeptide of collagen type I [1.89 (1.16–3.08)] and Interleukin-6 [1.83 (1.18–2.84)] were strongly associated with identifying patients with AF recurrence. Meta-regression highlighted that AF type had a significant impact on BNP levels (heterogeneity R2 = 55%). Subgroup analysis showed that high BNP levels were more strongly associated with AF recurrence in paroxysmal AF (PAF) cohorts compared to the addition of non-PAF patients. Egger’s test ruled out the presence of publication bias from small-study effects. Conclusion Ranking biomarkers based on the strength of association with outcome provides each biomarker relative capacity to predict AF recurrence. This will provide randomised controlled trials, a guide to choosing a priori tool for identifying patients likely to revert to AF, which are required to substantiate these findings

Catheter ablation vs. thoracoscopic surgical ablation in long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: CASA-AF randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: Long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) is challenging to treat with suboptimal catheter ablation (CA) outcomes. Thoracoscopic surgical ablation (SA) has shown promising efficacy in atrial fibrillation (AF). This multicentre randomized controlled trial tested whether SA was superior to CA as the first interventional strategy in de novo LSPAF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomized 120 LSPAF patients to SA or CA. All patients underwent predetermined lesion sets and implantable loop recorder insertion. Primary outcome was single procedure freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) ≥30 s without anti-arrhythmic drugs at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included clinical success (≥75% reduction in AF/AT burden); procedure-related serious adverse events; changes in patients' symptoms and quality-of-life scores; and cost-effectiveness. At 12 months, freedom from AF/AT was recorded in 26% (14/54) of patients in SA vs. 28% (17/60) in the CA group [OR 1.128, 95% CI (0.46-2.83), P = 0.83]. Reduction in AF/AT burden ≥75% was recorded in 67% (36/54) vs. 77% (46/60) [OR 1.13, 95% CI (0.67-4.08), P = 0.3] in SA and CA groups, respectively. Procedure-related serious adverse events within 30 days of intervention were reported in 15% (8/55) of patients in SA vs. 10% (6/60) in CA, P = 0.46. One death was reported after SA. Improvements in AF symptoms were greater following CA. Over 12 months, SA was more expensive and provided fewer quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with CA (0.78 vs. 0.85, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Single procedure thoracoscopic SA is not superior to CA in treating LSPAF. Catheter ablation provided greater improvements in symptoms and accrued significantly more QALYs during follow-up than SA. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN18250790 and ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02755688

The long-term outcomes of cardiac implantable electronic devices implanted via the femoral route

BACKGROUND: Conventional superior access for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is not always possible and femoral CIEDs (F-CIED) are an alternative option when leadless systems are not suitable. The long-term outcomes and extraction experiences with F-CIEDs, in particular complex F-CIED (ICD/CRT devices), remain poorly understood. METHODS: Patients referred for F-CIEDs implantation between 2002 and 2019 at two tertiary centers were included. Early complications were defined as ≤30 days following implant and late complications >30 days. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients (66% male; age 56 ± 20 years; 35% [11] patients with congenital heart disease) were implanted with F-CIEDs (10 ICD/CRT and 21 pacemakers). Early complications were observed in 6.5% of patients: two lead displacements. Late complications at 6.8 ± 4.4 years occurred in 29.0% of patients. This was higher with complex F-CIED compared to simple F-CIED (60.0% vs. 14.3%, p = .02). Late complications were predominantly generator site related (n = 8, 25.8%) including seven infections/erosions and one generator migration. Eight femoral generators and 14 leads (median duration in situ seven [range 6-11] years) were extracted without complication. CONCLUSIONS: Procedural success with F-CIEDs is high with clinically acceptable early complication rates. There is a notable risk of late complications, particularly involving the generator site of complex devices following repeat femoral procedures. Extraction of chronic F-CIED in experienced centers is feasible and safe

Catheter Ablation Versus Thoracoscopic Surgical Ablation in Long Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: CASA-AF Randomised Controlled Trial

AimsLong-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) is challenging to treat with suboptimal catheter ablation (CA) outcomes. Thoracoscopic surgical ablation (SA) has shown promising efficacy in atrial fibrillation (AF). This multicentre randomized controlled trial tested whether SA was superior to CA as the first interventional strategy in de novo LSPAF.Methods and resultsWe randomized 120 LSPAF patients to SA or CA. All patients underwent predetermined lesion sets and implantable loop recorder insertion. Primary outcome was single procedure freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) ≥30 s without anti-arrhythmic drugs at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included clinical success (≥75% reduction in AF/AT burden); procedure-related serious adverse events; changes in patients’ symptoms and quality-of-life scores; and cost-effectiveness. At 12 months, freedom from AF/AT was recorded in 26% (14/54) of patients in SA vs. 28% (17/60) in the CA group [OR 1.128, 95% CI (0.46–2.83), P = 0.83]. Reduction in AF/AT burden ≥75% was recorded in 67% (36/54) vs. 77% (46/60) [OR 1.13, 95% CI (0.67–4.08), P = 0.3] in SA and CA groups, respectively. Procedure-related serious adverse events within 30 days of intervention were reported in 15% (8/55) of patients in SA vs. 10% (6/60) in CA, P = 0.46. One death was reported after SA. Improvements in AF symptoms were greater following CA. Over 12 months, SA was more expensive and provided fewer quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with CA (0.78 vs. 0.85, P = 0.02).ConclusionSingle procedure thoracoscopic SA is not superior to CA in treating LSPAF. Catheter ablation provided greater improvements in symptoms and accrued significantly more QALYs during follow-up than SA.Clinical Trial RegistrationISRCTN18250790 and ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02755688</div