Background
The value of additional ablation beyond pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is unclear, especially for persistent AF. It is uncertain whether substrate modification with additional extensive ablation improves outcomes. We reviewed our experience to determine whether pulmonary vein isolation with additional extensive ablation (PVIEA) improves outcomes compared to pulmonary vein isolation alone (PVIA) for AF ablation.
Methods
Consecutive cases of patients with PVIA versus PVIEA were compared between September 9, 2013 and December 12, 2020. Procedural data collected include radiofrequency ablation delivery time (RADT) and arrhythmia inducibility. Clinical data collected include sinus rhythm maintenance post‐procedure.
Results
A total of 235 patients were studied (67 PVIA and 168 PVIEA). RADT was shorter when comparing ablation with PVIA versus PVIEA (32 vs. 40 min; p = .04). More arrhythmias were inducible with PVIEA (p < .01). There was no difference in sinus rhythm maintenance by Kaplan–Meier survival analysis (log‐rank test p = .75), after 3 or 12 months between groups overall, and when stratified by AF type (paroxysmal and persistent), left atrial volume, CHA2DS2‐VASc score, left ventricular ejection fraction, or catheter ablation setting (high‐power short‐duration, standard‐power standard‐duration, temperature‐controlled non‐contact‐force).
Conclusion
AF ablation with PVIA or PVIEA produces similar sinus rhythm maintenance overall and when stratified by catheter setting and AF type. PVIA reduced procedure times and less arrhythmias were inducible post‐ablation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.