No abstract

Background-Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is increasingly used in clinical practice. We aimed to study the natural history and long-term outcomes of ablated AF. Methods and Results-We followed 831 patients after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) performed in 2005. We documented clinical outcomes using our prospective AF registry with most recent update on this group of patients in October 2009. In the first year after ablation, 23.8% had early recurrence. Over long-term follow-up (55 months), only 8.9% had late arrhythmia recurrence defined as occurring beyond the first year after ablation. Repeat ablations in patients with late recurrence revealed conduction recovery in at least 1 of the previously isolated PVs in all of them and right-sided triggers with isoproterenol testing in 55.6%. At last follow-up, clinical improvement was 89.9% (79.4% arrhythmia-free off antiarrhythmic drugs and 10.5% with AF controlled with antiarrhythmic drugs). Only 4.6% continued to have drug-resistant AF. It was possible to safely discontinue anticoagulation in a substantial proportion of patients with no recurrence in the year after ablation (CHADS score Յ2, stroke incidence of 0.06% per year). The procedure-related complication rate was very low. Conclusions-Pulmonary vein isolation is safe and efficacious for long-term maintenance of sinus rhythm and control of symptoms in patients with drug-resistant AF. It obviates the need for antiarrhythmic drugs, negative dromotropic agents, and anticoagulants in a substantial proportion of patients. (Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2011;4:271-278.)

No abstract

Background Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a transient increased risk of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events. We hypothesized that dabigatran can be safely used as an alternative to continuous warfarin for the peri-procedural anticoagulation in PVI. Methods and Results 999 consecutive patients undergoing PVI were included; 376 patients were on dabigatran (150 mg) and 623 were on warfarin with therapeutic INR. Dabigatran was held 1 to 2 doses prior to PVI and restarted at the conclusion of the procedure or as soon as patients were transferred to the nursing floor. Propensity score matching was applied to generate a cohort of 344 patients in each group with balanced baseline data. Total hemorrhagic and thromboembolic complications were similar in both groups, before (3.2% vs 3.9%; p = 0.59), and after (3.2% vs 4.1%; p = 0.53) matching. Major hemorrhage occurred in 1.1% vs 1.6% (p = 0.48) before, and 1.2% vs 1.5% (p = 0.74) after matching in the dabigatran vs warfarin group respectively. A single thromboembolic event occurred in each of the dabigatran and warfarin groups. Despite higher doses of intra-procedural heparin, the mean ACT was significantly lower in patients who held dabigatran for 1 or 2 doses than those on warfarin. Conclusions Our study found no evidence to suggest a higher risk of thromboembolic or hemorrhagic complications with use of dabigatran for peri-procedural anticoagulation in patients undergoing PVI compared to uninterrupted warfarin therapy.