BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is commonly associated with cardiac structural abnormalities including mitral regurgitation (MR). Contemporary guidelines recommend consideration of early rhythm control strategies including catheter ablation (CA) for AF. However, the long-term efficacy of CA is highly variable across studies and patient populations, and the effect of coexisting MR on AF recurrence remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to determine the impact of significant MR (defined as ≥moderate) on AF recurrence rate after CA and whether CA for AF is associated with significant changes in the severity of MR.
METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for all English-language studies published to December 31, 2023, was performed.
RESULTS: A total of 17 studies (N = 2624 patients) were retained for meta-analysis. The pooled recurrence proportion of AF after CA in patients with baseline significant MR was 36% (95% CI, 27%-46%) compared with 27% (14%-41%) in patients without. The pooled hazard ratio (95% CI) for AF recurrence after CA in the presence of significant MR was 2.47 (1.52-4.01; P < .001; Egger test P value, .0583). The pooled proportion of patients who witnessed MR improvement to nonsignificant (ie, CONCLUSIONS: Baseline significant MR was independently predictive of AF recurrence rate after CA. Despite the increased AF recurrence rates after CA associated with significant MR, CA with maintenance of sinus rhythm appeared to improve the severity of MR, suggesting a possible induction of reverse positive atrial and mitral valvular remodeling.

UNASSIGNED: Although pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the mainstream way of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. The left atrial posterior wall (LAPW) may contributes to the development of AF as an arrhythmogenic substrate. The efficacy of additional left atrial posterior wall isolation (LAPWI) beyond PVI is in AF patients remains undefined. This study explored the influence of posterior wall isolation (PWI) on clinical outcomes in AF patients.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing the outcomes of AF with and without PWI. The efficacy outcomes were recurrence of all atrial arrhythmia (AA), atrial fibrillation (AF), and atrial flutter (AFL)/atrial tachycardia (AT). The safety outcomes were mainly focused on procedural adverse events.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 16 studies (7 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 3 prospective studies and 6 retrospective analyses) with 3340 AF patients were enrolled (1550 patients in PVI with PWI group and 1790 in PVI alone group). 12 studies included persistent atrial fibrillation patients, 3 studies with paroxysmal AF patients and 1 study with paroxysmal AF and persistent AF concurrently. Mean follow-up period was 16.56 months. In AF patients, adjunctive PWI obviously reduced the recurrence of all atrial arrhythmias (risk ratio (RR) 0.78 [95% CI 0.64-0.95], I 2 = 79%, p = 0.01) and the recurrence of AF (RR 0.68 [95% CI 0.53-0.88], I 2 = 75%, p = 0.004); Meanwhile, additional PWI left no impact substantially on lower recurrence of AFL/AT (RR 1.23 [95% CI 0.94-1.60], I 2 = 49%, p = 0.12). The results seemed to be no significant differences in occurrence rate of procedural complications between the PVI only and PWI+PVI (RR 1.19 [95% CI 0.80-1.79], I 2 = 0%, p = 0.39). In subgroup analyses, the benefit of adjunctive PWI compared with PVI only was more distinct in persistent AF group and cryoballoon ablation group. Notably, adjunctive PWI with radiofrequency ablation may induce a slight increase of recurrent AFL/AT compared with PVI only (RR 1.56 [95% CI 1.02-2.39], I 2 = 30%, p = 0.04).
UNASSIGNED: Compared with PVI alone, additional PWI to PVI appeared to be associated with decreased recurrence of AF and atrial arrhythmias without an increased occurrence of procedural complications, especially in persistent AF patients. Cryoballoon ablation seemed more suitable for PWI compared with radiofrequency ablation. More RCTs are needed to verify the conclusion.

BACKGROUND: Persistent Atrial Fibrillation (PeAF) is a challenging case for rhythm control modalities. Catheter ablation is the mainstay in PeAF management; however, data regarding the comparative safety and efficacy of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for PeAF is still limited. We aim to compare the safety and efficacy of CBA versus RFA for PeAF ablation.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which were retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane through October 2023. RevMan version 5.4 software was used to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
UNASSIGNED: CRD42023480314.
RESULTS: Three RCTs with 400 patients were included. There was no significant difference between RFA and CBA regarding AF recurrence (RR: 0.77, 95% CI [0.50, 1.20], P = 0.25), atrial tachycardia or atrial flutter recurrence (RR: 0.54, 95% CI [0.11, 2.76], P = 0.46), and any arrhythmia recurrence (RR: 0.96, 95% CI [0.70, 1.31], P = 0.80). CBA was significantly associated with decreased total procedure duration (MD: - 45.34, 95% CI [- 62.68, - 28.00], P < 0.00001), with no significant difference in fluoroscopy duration (MD: 3.59, 95% CI [- 5.13, 12.31], P = 0.42). Safety parameters were similar in both groups, including the incidence of any complications, phrenic nerve palsy (RR: 2.91 with 95% CI [0.31, 27.54], P = 0.35), access site complications (RR: 0.33 with 95% CI [0.05, 2.03], P = 0.23), and pericardial effusion.
CONCLUSIONS: In PeAF catheter ablation, CBA is comparable to RFA in terms of safety and efficacy. Also, CBA is associated with a shorter total procedure duration.

Catheter ablation has become an accepted first line therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF), with pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) being the key element of ablation strategies. Catheter ablation of AF has been proven to be superior to antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy regarding efficacy and improvement of survival in patients with heart failure. PVI has become a routine treatment procedure in recent decades especially for patients with symptomatic PAF. Recent research investigations have shown that AF recurrence still occurs in a significant number of patients after ablation. AF recurrence leads to a decrease in patients\' quality of life and is related to an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality. As most arrhythmia recurrences take place within the first 3 months after the initial procedure, this time period is seen as a so-called \"blanking period\", in which ablation is not recommended, since up to 50 % of patients can become arrhythmia free in the long run. Ablation therapy, however, is less successful in patients suffering from long standing persistent AF, with a 20.3 % success rate after a single procedure and a 45 % success rate after multiple RFA procedures. Several scores have been established and validated to predict cardiac rhythm outcomes after catheter ablation. However, due to the lack of external validation of most of the scores, their efficacy in predicting recurrence of atrial fibrillation needs to be further evaluated in independent external studies.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: High-power short-duration (HPSD) ablation has emerged as an alternative to conventional standard-power long-duration (SPLD) ablation. We aim to assess the efficacy and safety of HPSD versus SPLD for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) retrieved from PubMed, WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were performed through August 2023. We used RevMan V. 5.4 to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
UNASSIGNED: CRD42023471797.
RESULTS: We included six RCTs with a total of 694 patients. HPSD was significantly associated with a decreased total procedure time (MD: -22.88 with 95% CI [-36.13, -9.63], P = 0.0007), pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) time (MD: -19.73 with 95% CI [-23.93, -15.53], P < 0.00001), radiofrequency time (MD: -10.53 with 95% CI [-12.87, -8.19], P < 0.00001). However, there was no significant difference between HPSD and SPLD ablation with respect to the fluoroscopy time (MD: -0.69 with 95% CI [-2.00, 0.62], P = 0.30), the incidence of esophageal lesions (RR: 1.15 with 95% CI [0.43, 3.07], P = 0.77), and the incidence of first pass isolation (RR: 0.98 with 95% CI [0.88, 1.08], P = 0.65).
CONCLUSIONS: HPSD ablation was significantly associated with decreased total procedure time, PVI time, and radiofrequency time compared with SPLD ablation. On the contrary, SPLD ablation was significantly associated with low maximum temperature.

OBJECTIVE: Radiofrequency (RF) ablation is a prevalent treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF), targeting triggers within the pulmonary vein (PV) for elimination. This study evaluated heart rate variability (HRV) parameter changes at three intervals post-RF ablation: short-term (immediately to 1 month), medium-term (1 to 6 months), and long-term (6 months to 1 year). We compared two ablation techniques: circumferential PV isolation (CPVI) and segmental PV isolation (SPVI).
METHODS: A thorough search of databases, including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane, in 2022 yielded 835 pertinent studies. After inclusion criteria were applied, 22 studies were analyzed.
RESULTS: Results showed a marked decline in HRV parameters post-AF ablation, with LF/HF as an exception. These reductions persisted in short- and long-term evaluations up to a year post-procedure. Subgroup analysis revealed significant HRV declines, with distinct LF/HF values post-SPVI.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests the potential of decreased HRV as an indicator of autonomic denervation, necessitating further exploration to optimize therapeutic strategies and enhance patient outcomes.

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common cardiac arrhythmia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The higher mortality is due to the risk of heart failure and cardioembolic events. This in-depth review focuses on the strategies and efficacy of catheter ablation for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. The main medical databases were searched for contemporary studies on catheter ablation for non-paroxysmal AF. Catheter ablation is currently proven to be the most effective treatment for AF and consists of pulmonary vein isolation as the cornerstone plus additional ablations. In terms of SR maintenance, it is less effective in non-paroxysmal AF than in paroxysmal patients. but the clinical benefit in non-paroxysmal patients is substantially higher. Since pulmonary vein isolation is ineffective, a variety of techniques have been developed, e.g. linear ablations, ablation of complex atrial fractionated electrograms, etc. Another paradox consists in the technique of catheter ablation. Despite promising results in early observation studies, further randomized studies have not confirmed the initial enthusiasm. Recently, a new approach, pulsed-field ablation, appears promising. This is an in-depth summary of current technologies and techniques for the ablation of non-paroxysmal AF. We discuss the benefits, risks and implications in the treatment of patients with non-paroxysmal AF.

BACKGROUND: Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) is a standard catheter ablation technology with demonstrated clinical effectiveness for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF); however, it can be associated with major adverse events, including phrenic nerve paralysis. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel, minimally thermal technology with comparable effectiveness and low safety risk. This study aimed to compare the safety profiles of PFA and CBA through critical analyses of the literature and indirect treatment comparisons.
METHODS: Studies were identified by searching the MEDLINE database and the Clinicaltrials.gov registry. Registered clinical trials and/or Food and Drug Administration Investigation Device Exemption (FDA IDE) studies evaluating PFA or CBA in adult patients with drug-refractory PAF between January 2008 and March 2023 were selected. Comparative safety between PFA and CBA was assessed for major and prespecified adverse events. Indirect comparisons were conducted using the proportion of patients experiencing adverse events and confirmed with single-arm meta-analyses and sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS: Data were extracted from three PFA publications including a total of 497 patients and six CBA studies including a total of 1113 patients. The analysis revealed that PFA was associated with significantly lower risk of major adverse events {risk difference - 4.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) - 5.8, - 2.8]; risk ratio 0.16 [95% CI 0.07, 0.45]} and prespecified adverse events [risk difference - 2.5% (95% CI - 4.4, - 0.5); risk ratio 0.53 (95% CI 0.31, 0.96)]. Meta-analyses confirmed the lower rate of major adverse events for PFA [0.4% (95% CI 0.0, 1.3)] vs. CBA [5.6% (95% CI 2.6, 8.6)] and prespecified adverse events for PFA [2.7% (95% CI 1.2, 4.1)] vs. CBA [5.8% (95% CI 2.7, 9.0)]. Sensitivity analyses exploring heterogeneity across studies confirmed robustness of the main analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study show that PFA has a more favorable safety profile than CBA, with significantly lower risks of major and prespecified adverse events. These indirect comparisons help contextualize the safety of PFA compared to CBA for the treatment of drug-refractory PAF in the absence of head-to-head studies.

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of very-high-power short-duration (VHPSD) ablation (70-90 W/4-7 s) with conventional ablation (30-40 W/>20 s, 50 W/7-11 s) for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with AF. A total of 13 studies were included in this analysis (1,527 patients). AF recurrence occurred in 14% (95% CI [11-18%]) of the VHPSD group. VHPSD was associated with lower AF recurrence (OR 0.65; 95% CI [0.48-0.89]; p=0.006) compared with the conventional ablation group. Subgroup analysis showed that additional ablation beyond PVI had a similar rate of AF recurrence (16% versus 10%) compared with PVI alone. Procedure and ablation durations were significantly shorter in the VHPSD group with a mean differences of -14.4 minutes (p=0.017) and -14.1 minutes (p<0.001), respectively. Complications occurred in 6% (95% CI [3-9%]) of the VHPSD group, and the rate was similar between the two groups (OR 1.03; 95% CI [0.60-1.80]; p=0.498). VHPSD ablation resulted in less AF recurrence and a shorter procedure time. Additional ablation beyond PVI alone in VHPSD may not provide additional benefits.