Advertisement

Touch-up and recurrence rates after voltage mapping for verification of pulmonary vein isolation following cryoablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

  • Rajesh MalikEmail author
  • Bobby Malik
  • Tina D. Hunter
Article
  • 69 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The procedural endpoint following cryoballoon ablation (CA) for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) is pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), which is typically confirmed by entrance/exit block using a circular mapping catheter. The present study added an assessment of ablation gaps with high-density voltage mapping after standard confirmation of PVI. Relationships between the need for touch-up ablation, patient characteristics, and atrial arrhythmia recurrence were explored.

Methods

PAF patients received CA through standard of care treatment, with PVI assessed by bidirectional block confirmation, followed by voltage mapping. Radiofrequency ablation was performed as needed for voltage breakthrough and or additional rhythms. Freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence through 12-month follow-up was analyzed retrospectively with statistical survival models.

Results

A total of 77 PAF patients (age 66.1 ± 11.6, CHADS2 1.8 ± 1.0) were followed for 1.2 ± 0.3 years after CA. During the index procedure, pulmonary vein (PV) touch-up was required in 59 patients (76.6%) and ablation of additional atrial fibrillation targets beyond PV was required in 26 patients (33.8%). Kaplan-Meier estimates of freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence at 1 year were 62 ± 6%. Rates were lower for patients requiring touch-up ablation (58 ± 6% vs. 78 ± 10%) or with CHADS2 scores > 2 (33 ± 12% vs. 69 ± 6%). Cox regression models showed that the need for touch-up ablation increased recurrence (p = .045, HR = 2.6) after adjusting for hypertension and heart failure.

Conclusion

The high rate of PV touch-up suggests that initial CA lesions may be less durable than previously assumed, while the higher recurrence rate in patients requiring touch-up may indicate that additional factors make these patients more difficult to treat.

Keywords

Atrial fibrillation Catheter ablation Cryoablation Voltage mapping Recurrence Touch-up ablation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors appreciate the input of Megan Estes, Maciej Gonek, and Lee Ming Boo for their assistance in the study and manuscript development process.

Funding

This study was funded by Biosense Webster, Inc.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

R. Malik and B. Malik have no conflict of interest. TD Hunter is an employee of CTI Clinical Trial and Consulting Services, which is a consultant to Biosense Webster, Inc.

References

  1. 1.
    Calkins H, Kuck KH, Cappato R, Brugada J, Camm AJ, Chen S-A, et al. 2012 HRS/EHRA/ECAS Expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: recommendations for patient selection, procedural techniques, patient management and follow-up, definitions, endpoints, and research trial design. Heart Rhythm. 2012;9(4):632–96.e21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2011.12.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buiatti A, von Olshausen G, Barthel P, Schneider S, Luik A, Kaess B, et al. Cryoballoon vs. radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis of randomized and observational studies. Europace. 2017;19(3):378–84.  https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euw262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kuck K-H, Brugada J, Fürnkranz A, Metzner A, Ouyang F, Chun KRJ, et al. Cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(23):2235–45.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1602014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    El Haddad M, Taghji P, Phlips T, Wolf M, Demolder A, Choudhury R et al. Determinants of acute and late pulmonary vein reconnection in contact force–guided pulmonary vein isolation: identifying the weakest link in the ablation chain. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2017;10(4).  https://doi.org/10.1161/circep.116.004867.
  5. 5.
    Ouyang F, Tilz R, Chun J, Schmidt B, Wissner E, Zerm T, et al. Long-term results of catheter ablation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: lessons from a 5-year follow-up. Circulation. 2010;122(23):2368–77.  https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.110.946806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nery PB, Belliveau D, Nair GM, Bernick J, Redpath CJ, Szczotka A, et al. Relationship between pulmonary vein reconnection and atrial fibrillation recurrence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JACC: Clin Electrophysiol. 2016;2(4):474–83.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2016.02.003.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Conte G, Chierchia GB, Sieira J, Levinstein M, Casado-Arroyo R, De Asmundis C, et al. Repeat procedure using radiofrequency energy for recurrence of atrial fibrillation after initial cryoballoon ablation: a 2-year follow-up. Europace. 2013;15(10):1421–5.  https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eut098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reddy VY, Neuzil P, d’Avila A, Laragy M, Malchano ZJ, Kralovec S, et al. Balloon catheter ablation to treat paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: what is the level of pulmonary venous isolation? Heart Rhythm. 2008;5(3):353–60.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.11.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Steven D, Sultan A, Reddy V, Luker J, Altenburg M, Hoffmann B, et al. Benefit of pulmonary vein isolation guided by loss of pace capture on the ablation line: results from a prospective 2-center randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62(1):44–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.03.059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baldinger SH, Kumar S, Barbhaiya CR, Nagashima K, Epstein LM, John R, et al. The timing and frequency of pulmonary veins unexcitability relative to completion of a wide area circumferential ablation line for pulmonary vein isolation. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2016;2(1):14–23.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2015.09.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Epicoco Md G, Sorgente Md PA. Predictors of atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation. J Atrial Fibrillation. 2014;6(5):1016.  https://doi.org/10.4022/jafib.1016.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weerasooriya R, Khairy P, Litalien J, Macle L, Hocini M, Sacher F, et al. Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: are results maintained at 5 years of follow-up? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57(2):160–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2010.05.061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sultan A, Lüker J, Andresen D, Kuck KH, Hoffmann E, Brachmann J, et al. Predictors of atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation: data from the German Ablation Registry. Sci Rep. 2017;7:16678.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-16938-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fioravanti F, Brisinda D, Sorbo AR, Lombardi G, La Brocca L, Fenici R. Compliance in weight control reduces atrial fibrillation worsening: a retrospective cohort study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2017;27(8):711–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.numecd.2017.04.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bunch TJ, May HT, Bair TL, Crandall BG, Cutler MJ, Jacobs V, et al. Long-term influence of body mass index on cardiovascular events after atrial fibrillation ablation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2016;46(3):259–65.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-016-0142-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, Boechler M, Rich MW, Radford MJ. Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the national registry of atrial fibrillation. JAMA. 2001;285(22):2864–70.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.22.2864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lip GYH, Nieuwlaat R, Pisters R, Lane DA, Crijns HJGM. Refining clinical risk stratification for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor-based approach. CHEST. 2010;137(2):263–72.  https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.09-1584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wójcik M, Berkowitsch A, Zaltsberg S, Hamm CW, Pitschner HF, Kuniss M, et al. Cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation: how important is the proper selection of patients? Cardiol J. 2015;22(2):194–200.  https://doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2014.0100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Akkaya E, Berkowitsch A, Greiss H, Hamm CW, Sperzel J, Neumann T, et al. PLAAF score as a novel predictor of long-term outcome after second-generation cryoballoon pulmonary vein isolation [published online ahead of print November 16, 2017.]. Europace. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eux295.  https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eux295
  20. 20.
    Kuhne M, Suter Y, Altmann D, Ammann P, Schaer B, Osswald S, et al. Cryoballoon versus radiofrequency catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: biomarkers of myocardial injury, recurrence rates, and pulmonary vein reconnection patterns. Heart Rhythm. 2010;7(12):1770–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2010.08.028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wei HQ, Guo XG, Zhou GB, Sun Q, Liu X, Yang JD, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation with real-time pulmonary vein potential recording using second-generation cryoballoon: procedural and biophysical predictors of acute pulmonary vein reconnection. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;41(1):14–21.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.13230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ciconte G, Chierchia GB, C DEA, Sieira J, Conte G, Julia J, et al. Spontaneous and adenosine-induced pulmonary vein reconnection after cryoballoon ablation with the second-generation device. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2014;25(8):845–51.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.12421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Miyazaki S, Taniguchi H, Hachiya H, Nakamura H, Takagi T, Hirao K, et al. Clinical recurrence and electrical pulmonary vein reconnections after second-generation cryoballoon ablation. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13(9):1852–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.05.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kottkamp H, Berg J, Bender R, Rieger A, Schreiber D. Box isolation of fibrotic areas (BIFA): a patient-tailored substrate modification approach for ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016;27(1):22–30.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.12870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schreiber D, Rieger A, Moser F, Kottkamp H. Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation with box isolation of fibrotic areas: lessons on fibrosis distribution and extent, clinical characteristics, and their impact on long-term outcome. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017;28(9):971–83.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.13278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Masuda M, Fujita M, Iida O, Okamoto S, Ishihara T, Nanto K, et al. Left atrial low-voltage areas predict atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Int J Cardiol. 2018;257:97–101.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.12.089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Electrophysiology Department, McLeod Cardiology AssociatesMcLeod Heart and Vascular InstituteFlorenceUSA
  2. 2.Osteopathic MedicineVCOM-CarolinasSpartanburgUSA
  3. 3.Real World EvidenceCTI Clinical Trial and Consulting ServicesCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations