T ranscatheter ablation represents a valid treatment option in patients with drug-refractory symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). 1 The majority of catheter ablation trials have mainly enrolled patients with preserved left ventricular (LV) systolic function. In these patients, the ablative treatment has been shown to be effective in reducing morbidity, 2-4 improving the quality of life (QoL), [3][4][5][6] and improving functional capacity. 5-7Background-Whether catheter ablation (CA) is superior to amiodarone (AMIO) for the treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure is unknown. Methods and Results-Thiswas an open-label, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study. Patients with persistent AF, dualchamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator, New York Heart Association II to III, and left ventricular ejection fraction <40% within the past 6 months were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to undergo CA for AF (group 1, n=102) or receive AMIO (group 2, n=101). Recurrence of AF was the primary end point. All-cause mortality and unplanned hospitalization were the secondary end points. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 24 months. At the end of follow-up, 71 (70%; 95% confidence interval, 60%-78%) patients in group 1 were recurrence free after an average of 1.4±0.6 procedures in comparison with 34 (34%; 95% confidence interval, 25%-44%) in group 2 (log-rank P<0.001). The success rate of CA in the different centers after a single procedure ranged from 29% to 61%. After adjusting for covariates in the multivariable model, AMIO therapy was found to be significantly more likely to fail (hazard ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-4.3; P<0.001) than CA. Over the 2-year follow-up, the unplanned hospitalization rate was (32 [31%] in group 1 and 58 [57%] in group 2; P<0.001), showing 45% relative risk reduction (relative risk, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.76). A significantly lower mortality was observed in CA (8 [8%] versus AMIO (18 [18%]; P=0.037). Conclusions-This multicenter randomized study shows that CA of AF is superior to AMIO in achieving freedom from AF at long-term follow-up and reducing unplanned hospitalization and mortality in patients with heart failure and persistent AF. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00729911. However, a significant number of patients with AF also have LV systolic dysfunction. AF and heart failure (HF) frequently coexist and are often associated with several common predisposing risk factors such as hypertension, coronary artery disease, structural heart disease (nonischemic, valvular), diabetes mellitus, obesity, and obstructive sleep apnea . 8,9 Importantly, the prevalence of AF increases with HF severity, ranging from 5% in functional class I patients to ≈50% in class IV patients.Also, the prevalence of HF in patients with AF has been estimated at 42%. 8 The combination of HF and AF leads to deleterious hemodynamic and symp...

This randomized study showed that both after a single procedure and after redo procedures in patients with LSPAF, empirical electrical isolation of the LAA improved long-term freedom from atrial arrhythmias without increasing complications. (Effect of Empirical Left Atrial Appendage Isolation on Long-term Procedure Outcome in Patients With Persistent or Longstanding Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Catheter Ablation [BELIEF]; NCT01362738).

BACKGROUND Many centers use radiofrequency (RF) energy at 25-35 W for 30-60 seconds. There is a safety concern about using higher power, especially on the posterior wall.OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to examine complication rates for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations performed with highpower, short-duration RF energy. METHODSWe examined the complication rates of 4 experienced centers performing AF ablations at RF powers from 45-50 W for 2-15 seconds per lesion. In total, 13,974 ablations were performed in 10,284 patients. On the posterior wall, 11,436 ablations used 45-50 W for 2-10 seconds, and 2538 ablations used power reduced to 35 W for 20 seconds. Esophageal temperature monitoring was used in 13,858 (99.2%).RESULTS Demographics were age 64 6 11 years, male 68%, left atrial size 4.4 6 0.7 cm, paroxysmal AF 37%, persistent AF 42%, longstanding AF 20%, antiarrhythmic drugs failed 1.4 6 0.7, hypertension 54%, diabetes 15%, previous cerebrovascular accident/ transient ischemic attack 7%, and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score 2.1 6 1.4. Procedural time was 116 6 41 minutes. Complications were death in 2 (0.014%; 1 due to stroke and 1 due to atrioesophageal fistula), pericardial tamponade in 33 (0.24%; 26 tapped, 7 surgical), strokes ,48 hours in 6 (0.043%), strokes 48 hours-30 days in 6 (0.043%), pulmonary vein stenosis requiring intervention in 2 (0.014%), phrenic nerve paralysis in 2 (0.014%; both resolved), steam pops 2 (0.014%) without complications, and catheter char 0 (0.00%). There was 1 atrioesophageal fistula in 11,436 ablations using power 45-50 W on the posterior wall and 3 in 2538 ablated with 35 W on the posterior wall (P 5 .021), although 2 of the 3 had no esophageal monitoring during a fluoroless procedure.CONCLUSION AF ablations can be performed at 45-50 W for short durations with very low complication rates. High-power, short-duration ablations have the potential to shorten procedural and total RF times and create more localized and durable lesions.

Strict adherence to an anticoagulation protocol significantly reduces the prevalence of SCI after catheter ablation of AF with RF energy.

An extensive substrate-based ablation approach is superior to ablation targeting only clinical and stable VTs in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy presenting with tolerated VT. (Ablation of Clinical Ventricular Tachycardia Versus Addition of Substrate Ablation on the Long Term Success Rate of VT Ablation (VISTA); NCT01045668).

"Outcome of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation After Permanent Pulmonary Vein Antrum Isolation With or Without Proven Left Atrial Posterior Wall Isolation" (LIBERATION). ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01660100.

No abstract

In patients with LSPAF and enlarged left atrium, a concomitant combined surgical/endocardial ablation approach increases complication rate and does not improve outcomes when compared to extensive endocardial ablation only.