OBJECTIVES
The Cox-maze IV is the gold standard for surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). A heart-team hybrid approach using selected epicardial thoracoscopic surgical ablations and completion endocardial ablations to replicate the Cox-maze IV lesion set has gained popularity and early results have been promising. We herein report our single-centre long-term clinical outcomes using the heart-team hybrid approach with 455 patients.
METHODS
From 1 March 2013 to 1 July 2019, we prospectively collected data on all patients referred to our heart team for rhythm-control strategy for AF. Baseline characteristics, procedural complications and long-term freedom from AF (FFAF) both on and off anti-arrhythmic drug therapy were analysed. Ambulatory monitoring (>7 days) was obtained at 3 months and annually thereafter.
RESULTS
Four hundred and fifty-five patients completed the hybrid approach. Four hundred and forty-five (97.8%) patients had non-paroxysmal AF (long-standing persistent AF n = 249, 54.7%; persistent AF n = 196, 43.1%; paroxysmal AF n = 10, 2.2%). Average duration of AF was 5.9 ± 6.1 years. Average left atrial diameter was 4.8 ± 0.8 cm. FFAF at 3, 12, 24 and 36 months was 92%, 87%, 81% and 72%, respectively. FFAF without the use of anti-arrhythmic medications was 75%, 81%, 76% and 66%. Any surgical complications occurred in 28 (6.1%) patients.
CONCLUSIONS
A heart-team hybrid strategy for the treatment of AF is safe and effective. In a predominantly non-paroxysmal population with AF, at the 3-year follow-up, FFAF in patients on and off anti-arrhythmic drugs approaches that of patients who had the Cox-maze IV.
Deconvolution estimated local activation time more accurately than the other metrics (P < .0001). Furthermore, the algorithm quantified changes in morphology (P < .0001) with superior performance, detecting electrograms recorded from regions of myocardial infarction. Thus, deconvolution, which incorporates a priori knowledge of electrogram morphology, shows promise to improve present clinical metrics.
Thirty-nine consecutive patients with symptomatic AV nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) underwent temperature guided slow AV nodal pathway ablation (group 1). Forty-three consecutive patients undergoing nontemperature guided slow AV nodal pathway ablation late in our experience compose the control population (group 2). Slow pathway ablation was achieved in all patients of both groups. The mean fluoroscopy and ablation times for group 1 were significantly shorter than for group 2 (26.1 +/- 14.9 vs 33.9 +/- 18.9 min, P < 0.05; 19.9 +/- 12.1 vs 30.9 +/- 23.3 min, P < or = 0.02). There were no episodes of coagulum formation in group 1, while there were 15 episodes (7.1% of energy applications) in group 2 (P = 0.0006) despite a significantly higher applied power in group 1 (53.4 +/- 25.1 vs 35.6 +/- 9.5W, P = 0.0001). Successful energy applications were associated with significantly higher temperatures than unsuccessful applications in group 1 (55.6 degrees +/- 5.8 degrees C vs. 52.9 degrees +/- 6.8 degrees C, P < or = 0.03). The minimum temperature required for successful ablation was 48 degrees C for two patients (5%) and was > or = 50 degrees C for the remainder of patients (37/39 [95%]). The catheter ablation system used in this study was safe, effective, and prevented coagulum formation while delivering relatively high power. In addition, shorter ablation times and radiation exposure were seen with this system. Although successful energy applications and the production of junctional rhythm were associated with higher achieved temperatures, temperature alone did not predict either endpoint. Future prospective, randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings and further evaluate the value of temperature monitoring.
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.