In patients undergoing ablation for atrial fibrillation, anticoagulation with uninterrupted dabigatran was associated with fewer bleeding complications than uninterrupted warfarin. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; RE-CIRCUIT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02348723 .).
AimsIt is recommended to perform atrial fibrillation ablation with continuous anticoagulation. Continuous apixaban has not been tested.Methods and resultsWe compared continuous apixaban (5 mg b.i.d.) to vitamin K antagonists (VKA, international normalized ratio 2–3) in atrial fibrillation patients at risk of stroke a prospective, open, multi-centre study with blinded outcome assessment. Primary outcome was a composite of death, stroke, or bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2–5). A high-resolution brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sub-study quantified acute brain lesions. Cognitive function was assessed by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) at baseline and at end of follow-up. Overall, 674 patients (median age 64 years, 33% female, 42% non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, 49 sites) were randomized; 633 received study drug and underwent ablation; 335 undertook MRI (25 sites, 323 analysable scans). The primary outcome was observed in 22/318 patients randomized to apixaban, and in 23/315 randomized to VKA {difference −0.38% [90% confidence interval (CI) −4.0%, 3.3%], non-inferiority P = 0.0002 at the pre-specified absolute margin of 0.075}, including 2 (0.3%) deaths, 2 (0.3%) strokes, and 24 (3.8%) ISTH major bleeds. Acute small brain lesions were found in a similar number of patients in each arm [apixaban 44/162 (27.2%); VKA 40/161 (24.8%); P = 0.64]. Cognitive function increased at the end of follow-up (median 1 MoCA unit; P = 0.005) without differences between study groups.ConclusionsContinuous apixaban is safe and effective in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation at risk of stroke with respect to bleeding, stroke, and cognitive function. Further research is needed to reduce ablation-related acute brain lesions.
Aims
Edoxaban is a direct factor Xa inhibitor approved for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). Uninterrupted edoxaban therapy in patients undergoing AF ablation has not been tested.
Methods and results
The ELIMINATE-AF trial, a multinational, multicentre, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study, was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of once-daily edoxaban 60 mg (30 mg in patients indicated for dose reduction) vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in AF patients undergoing catheter ablation. Patients were randomized 2:1 to edoxaban vs. VKA. The primary endpoint (per-protocol population) was time to first occurrence of all-cause death, stroke, or International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis-defined major bleeding during the period from the end of the ablation procedure to end of treatment (90 days). Overall, 632 patients were enrolled, 614 randomized, and 553 received study drug and underwent ablation; 177 subjects underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging to assess silent cerebral infarcts. The primary endpoint (only major bleeds occurred) was observed in 0.3% (1 patient) on edoxaban and 2.0% (2 patients) on VKA [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.16 (0.02–1.73)]. In the ablation population (modified intent-to-treat population including patients with ablation), the primary endpoint was observed in 2.7% of edoxaban (N = 10) and 1.7% of VKA patients (N = 3) between start of ablation and end of treatment. There were one ischaemic and one haemorrhagic stroke, both in patients on edoxaban. Cerebral microemboli were detected in 13.8% (16) patients who received edoxaban and 9.6% (5) patients in the VKA group (nominal P = 0.62).
Conclusion
Uninterrupted edoxaban therapy represents an alternative to uninterrupted VKA treatment in patients undergoing AF ablation.
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation outcome is still operator dependent. Ablation Index (AI) is a new lesion quality marker that has been demonstrated to allow acute durable pulmonary vein (PV) isolation followed by a high single-procedure arrhythmia-free survival.This prospective, multicenter study was designed to evaluate the reproducibility of acute PV isolation guided by the AI.Methods: A total of 490 consecutive patients with paroxysmal (80.4%) and persistent AF underwent first time PV encircling and were divided in four study groups according to operator preference in choosing the ablation catheter (a contact force [ST] or contact force surround flow [STSF] catheter) and the AI setting (330 at posterior and 450 at anterior wall or 380 at posterior and 500 at anterior wall). Radiofrequency was delivered targeting interlesion distance ≤6 mm.
Results:The rate of first-pass PV isolation (ST330 90 ± 16%, ST380 87 ± 19%, STSF330 90 ± 17%, STSF380 91 ± 15%, P = .585) was similar among the four study groups, whereas procedure (ST330 129 ± 44 minutes, ST380 144 ± 44 minutes, STSF330 120 ± 72 minutes, STSF380 125 ± 73 minutes, P < .001) and fluoroscopy time (ST330 542 ± 285 seconds, ST380 540 ± 416 seconds, STSF330 257 ± 356 seconds, STSF380 379 ± 454 seconds, P < 0.001) significantly differed. The difference in the rate of first-pass isolation was not statistical different (P = .06) among the 12 operators that performed at least 15 procedures.
Conclusions:An ablation protocol respecting strict criteria for contiguity and quality lesion results in high and comparable rate of acute PV isolation among operator performing ablation with different catheters, AI settings, procedure, and fluoroscopy times. K E Y W O R D S ablation index, atrial fibrillation, catheter ablation, reproducibility 874
AF ablation with nMARQ is associated with short procedure times and high acute success rates. Further research is necessary to more clearly define long-term outcome.
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.