Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia worldwide and remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, a significant proportion of patients have persistent AF, for which conventional catheter ablation is less effective. However, convergent ablation has emerged in recent years as a hybrid treatment targeting both the epicardium and endocardium in a multidisciplinary joint cardiothoracic and electrophysiology procedure, with promising efficacy outcomes in recent studies. This treatment is increasingly being performed in the United Kingdom. This review article discusses the rationale and evidence behind convergent ablation, along with factors that need to be considered when setting up a successful ablation service.

Although significant strides have been made in non-pharmacologic management of atrial fibrillation (AF), these treatments remain a work in progress. While catheter ablation is often effective for management of paroxysmal AF, it is less successful in patients with persistent or longstanding persistent AF. This review was undertaken to clarify the risks, benefits, and alternatives to catheter ablation for non-pharmacologic AF management. In order to clarify the roles of surgical and hybrid ablation, this narrative review was undertaken by searching MEDLINE to identify peer-reviewed clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, review articles, and other clinically relevant studies. The search was limited to English-language reports published between 1960 and 2023. Atrial fibrillation was searched using the terms surgical ablation, catheter ablation, hybrid ablation, stroke prevention, left atrial occlusion, and atrial excision. Google and Google Scholar, as well as bibliographies of identified articles, were also reviewed for additional references. The Cox-maze surgical approach is still the most efficacious non-pharmacological treatment for AF. Hybrid ablation, combining cardiac surgical and catheter ablation techniques, has become an attractive option for persistent or longstanding persistent AF.

Nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation continues to challenge electrophysiologist and surgeons alike. Stand-alone endocardial catheter ablation has resulted in less than satisfying results, and while the on-pump Cox-Maze surgery has excellent results, the invasiveness has limited its adoption amongst both referring providers and surgeons. The CONVERGE IDE trial has shed new light on this once dim problem. EPs and Surgeons are now working together in a Hybrid Team Ablation Approach to provide a combined ablation strategy that has improved patient outcomes and rekindled the collaboration necessary to better patient outcomes. We herein summarize the current Hybrid Team Ablation Approaches (CONVERGE and Totally Thoracoscopic) with nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation.

UNASSIGNED: To assess feasibility, safety, and early efficacy of robotic-enhanced epicardial ablation (RE-EA) as first stage of a hybrid approach to patients with persistent (PsAF) and long-standing atrial fibrillation (LSAF).
UNASSIGNED: Single-center, retrospective analysis of patients with documented PsAF and LSAF who underwent RE-EA followed by catheter-guided endocardial ablation. Postoperatively, patients were monitored for major adverse events and underwent rhythm follow-up at 3 and 12 months.
UNASSIGNED: Between January 2021 and June 2023, we performed RE-EA in 64 patients (73.5% male, CHA2DS2-VASc 2.7 ± 1.6, BMI 34.1 ± 6.3 kg/m2). Mean AF preoperative duration and left atrial volume index were, respectively, 85 months and 47.5 mL/m2. Through the robotic approach, the intended lesion set was completed in all patients without cardiopulmonary bypass support, conversion to thoracotomy/sternotomy, blood transfusions, or perioperative mortality. The average LOS was 1.7 days, with only 1 patient requiring intensive care unit admission and >65% of patients discharged within 24 hours. At follow-up, 2 (3.1%) patients experienced new left pleural effusion or hemidiaphragm paralysis requiring treatment. There were no readmissions related to AF, stroke, thromboembolic events, or deaths. The mean interval between the epicardial and endocardial stages of the procedure was 5.9 months. Rhythm follow-up showed AF resolution in 73.4% and 71.9% of patients at 3 and 12 months, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: RE-EA is a feasible and safe, first-stage approach for the treatment of patients with PsAF and LSAF. It improves exposure of the intended targets, favors short hospital stay, and facilitates return to activity with satisfactory AF treatment in the short term.

Background: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a standard-of-care treatment in the rhythm control strategy of symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). Ablation protocols, varying in the power and duration of energy delivery, have changed rapidly in recent years. Very high-power very short-duration ablation (vHPvSD) is expected to shorten procedural times compared to conventional ablation approaches. However, the existing data suggest that this might come at the cost of lower first-pass isolation rates, a predictor of poor ablation long-term outcomes. This study aims to compare a vHPvSD protocol to a hybrid strategy, in which the power and duration of the energy transfer are adapted depending on the anatomical location. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed procedural and outcome data from 93 patients (55 vHPvSD vs. 38 hybrid) scheduled for de novo pulmonary vein isolation. A vHPvSD ablation protocol (90 Watt (W), 4 s) was compared to a hybrid protocol using vHPvSD on the posterior wall and 50 W HPSD (high-power short-duration) ablation guided by the Ablation Index along the remaining spots. Results: Ablation times were significantly shorter in the vHPvSD cohort (5.4 min. vs. 14.2 min, p < 0.001), thus resulting in a significant reduction in the overall procedural duration (91 min vs. 106 min, p = 0.003). The non-significant slightly higher first-pass isolation rates in the vHPvSD cohort (85% vs. 76%, p = 0.262) did not affect freedom from AF 6 months after the procedure (83% vs. 87%, p = 0.622). Conclusions: vHPvSD helps in shortening the PVI procedural duration, thus neither affecting first-pass isolation rates nor freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence at 6 months after the index procedure.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is widely accepted to be the most common sustained arrhythmia, with an increasing incidence over time. This is thought to be due to the aging population across the world. AF occurs when abnormal electrical foci result in disorganization of atrial depolarization, though the exact pathophysiology leading to these abnormal foci is not well understood. A range of interventions exist for AF - pharmacological therapies (anti-arrhythmic or negative chronotropic medications), cardioversion, or ablations to interrupt the abnormal conduction pathways. Ablation may be via a catheter-based approach, via a surgical approach using the \"Maze\" procedure (Cox-Maze IV), or more recently, via a hybrid approach. This first involves a surgical epicardial ablation, with catheter-based endocardial ablation following a few weeks later to ensure durable transmural lesion sets via the \"Convergent\" procedure. We describe the use of the Da Vinci Xi™ robotic platform to improve the procedure, allowing continuous and improved visualization of the anatomy without the need for potentially harmful retraction of the atrial appendage or the back of the left atrium, as well as increased precision with our mapping tools and more complete ablation. Here, we highlight the advantages over a non-robotic (subxiphoid) Convergent procedure, while outlining the key operative steps in undertaking the \"Robotic Convergent Plus\" procedure using the Da Vinci Xi™ robotic surgical system.

OBJECTIVE: Thoracoscopic hybrid ablation is an effective and safe rhythm control strategy for patients with complex forms of atrial fibrillation. Its effect on left atrial function has not yet been studied.
METHODS: In a retrospective single-centre analysis of patients undergoing thoracoscopic hybrid ablation, the left atrial emptying fraction was calculated using the biplane modified Simpson method in the apical 2- and 4-chamber views on transthoracic echocardiography. Left atrial strain (reservoir, conduction and contractility) was quantified using dedicated software.
RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were included (mean age 64 years, long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation in 69%, median atrial fibrillation history duration 64 months). At baseline, left atrial function and contractility were poor. The reservoir and contractile strain improved postprocedure compared to baseline [15 (standard deviation (SD): 8) and 17 (SD: 6); P = 0.013; 3 (SD: 5) and 4 (SD: 4), P = 0.008], whereas the left atrial volume indexed to the body surface area was reduced [51 ml/m2 (SD: 14) and 47 ml/m2 (SD: 18), P = 0.0024]. In patients with preoperative (long-standing) persistent atrial fibrillation and in patients with rhythm restoration, improvements in the emptying fraction, (reservoir and contractile) strain and the left ventricular ejection fraction were observed, whereas the left atrial volume decreased (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients with severely diseased left atria, improvement in left atrial contractility and in the emptying fraction after thoracoscopic hybrid ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation is mainly due to rhythm restoration. Interestingly, the procedure itself also results in improved left atrial reservoir strain and reversed left atrial remodelling by reducing left atrial volume.

UNASSIGNED: Pericarditis is the most common complication following hybrid sinus node-sparing ablation for inappropriate sinus tachycardia (IST)/postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS).
UNASSIGNED: The study sought to evaluate the association of prophylaxis therapy on the risk of symptomatic pericarditis following hybrid IST/POTS ablation.
UNASSIGNED: All consecutive patients undergoing to hybrid ablation of symptomatic IST/POTS refractory or intolerant to drugs were retrospectively analyzed. Pharmacological prophylaxis therapy was based on acetylsalicylic acid and colchicine started on the day of the ablation and continued for at least 3 months. The primary endpoint was occurrence of symptomatic pericarditis. The secondary endpoint was occurrence of pericarditis-related complications, including the following: duration of pericarditis >3 months, hospitalization for pericarditis, postpericardiectomy pleuro-pericarditis, and pericardiectomy.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 220 patients undergone to hybrid IST/POTS ablation were included and 44 (20%) underwent prophylaxis therapy. Pericarditis occurred in 101 (45.9%) patients, with 97 (96%) in the first 5 days. At survival analysis, prophylaxis was associated with higher rate of freedom from pericarditis (81.9% vs 47.2%, log-rank P < .001). Pericarditis-related complications were low, occurring in 7 (3.2%) patients. There was no difference in pericarditis-related complications between the patients who underwent prophylaxis therapy and patients who did not. At Cox multivariate analysis, predictors of pericarditis were IST (vs POTS) (hazard ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval0.39-0.99, P = .04) and prophylaxis therapy (hazard ratio 0.27, 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.55, P < .001).
UNASSIGNED: In a large cohort of patients undergoing hybrid ablation for IST/POTS, a prophylaxis therapy with acetylsalicylic acid and colchicine was associated with a lower rate of symptomatic pericarditis.

UNASSIGNED: Treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) has evolved significantly, with pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) becoming an established treatment. However, the outcomes following catheter ablation for persistent AF remain unsatisfactory. Hybrid catheter-surgical ablation has emerged as a therapeutic approach for persistent AF, combining the strengths of both interventions. The purpose of this narrative review is to comprehensively examine the current state of knowledge regarding hybrid ablation for AF.
UNASSIGNED: A thorough PubMed search using the terms \"hybrid ablation\", \"atrial fibrillation\", \"catheter ablation\", and \"guideline on cardiology\" within the timeframe of 1980 to 2024 resulted in 138,969 articles. Consensus on the selected articles was reached through a series of structured meetings and discussions.
UNASSIGNED: PVI has demonstrated higher sinus rhythm maintenance rates, especially for paroxysmal AF. However, the efficacy is not as high for persistent AF. Additional ablation strategies, such as linear ablation, complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation, low voltage zone ablation as well as posterior wall isolation, lack consistent evidence of effectiveness. Hybrid ablation, involving collaboration between cardiac surgeons and electrophysiologists, presents a promising alternative for hard-to-treat AF. Recent studies report favorable outcomes of hybrid ablation, with atrial arrhythmia-free rates ranging from 53.5% to 76%, surpassing those of catheter ablation alone, which might result from better lesion durability or intervention for non-PV foci and left atrial appendage excision or closure during hybrid ablation. The rate of complications associated with hybrid ablation is higher than catheter ablation alone.
UNASSIGNED: While favorable outcomes of hybrid ablation for persistent AF have been reported, it is not recommended for all AF patients due to its invasiveness compared to catheter ablation. Additionally, some patients with persistent AF maintain sinus rhythm with catheter ablation alone. More clinical data are needed to determine which patients are suitable candidates for hybrid ablation.

In this state-of-the art review on hybrid atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, we briefly focus on the pathophysiology of AF, the rationale for the hybrid approach, its technical aspects and the efficacy and safety outcomes after hybrid AF ablation, both from meta-analyses and randomized control trial data. Also, we performed a systematic search to provide a provisional overview of real-world hybrid AF ablation efficacy and safety outcomes. Furthermore, we give an insight into the \'Maastricht approach\', an approach that allows us to tailor the ablation procedure to the individual patient. Finally, we reflect on future perspectives with the objective to continue improving our thoracoscopic hybrid AF ablation approach. Based on the review of the available literature, we believe it is fair to state that thoracoscopic hybrid AF ablation is a valid alternative to catheter ablation for the treatment of patients with more persistent forms of AF.