Optimal Method and Outcomes of Catheter Ablation of Persistent AF: The STAR AF 2 Trial Atul Verma, Jiang Chen-yang, Tim Betts, John Radcliffe, Jian Chen, Isabel Deisenhofer, Roberto Mantovan, Laurent Macle, Carlos Morillo, Prashanthan Sanders on behalf of the STAR AF 2 Investigators ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01203748 The STAR AF 2 trial was funded by St Jude Medical Inc. Disclosures • Dr Verma reports having served on advisory boards for and receiving grant support from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and St Jude Medical. • Dr Betts reports lecture fees and grant support from St Jude Medical. • Dr Macle reports receiving consulting fees from St Jude Medical, Biosense Webster, Bristol Meyers Squibb, and Pfizer and grant support from St Jude Medical and Biosense Webster. • Dr Morillo reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, St Jude Medical, and Boehringer Ingelheim and grant support from Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster, Pfizer, and Merck. • Dr Sanders reports having served on advisory boards for and receiving grant support and lecture fees from Biosense-Webster, Medtronic, St Jude Medical, Sanofi-Aventis, and Merck; receiving lecture fees and grant support from Biotronik; and receiving grant support from Sorin. • Drs. Jiang, Chen, Deisenhofer, and Mantovan do not have any disclosures. Background • Catheter ablation is an effective treatment for symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) • Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is considered the cornerstone for catheter ablation of AF • Ablation of persistent AF is challenging and typically has less favorable outcomes compared to paroxysmal AF Background • To improve outcomes for persistent AF, guidelines suggest that “operators should consider more extensive ablation based on linear lesions or complex fractionated electrograms” in addition to PV isolation • Whether more extensive ablation improves outcomes is unclear Purpose • To compare the efficacy of three different AF ablation strategies in patients with persistent AF: (1) Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone (2) PVI plus complex fractionated electrograms (PVI+CFE) (3) PVI plus linear ablation (PVI+Lines). Methods - Patients • 589 patients were recruited from 48 experienced ablation centers in 12 countries • Inclusion: symptomatic persistent AF (a sustained episode > 7 days and < 3 years) refractory to at least one antiarrhythmic drug undergoing first-time ablation • Exclusion: paroxysmal AF, sustained AF episode > 3 years, left atrial diameter > 60 mm Methods – Trial Design • Patients were randomized 1:4:4 to the three strategies: – PVI, PVI+CFE, PVI+Lines • Patients were blinded to the strategy (single blind) • Repeat ablation procedures allowed between 3-6 months using the same randomized strategy as the first ablation Methods – Ablation Strategy • PVI = PV antral isolation with endpoint of entrance and exit block by a circular mapping catheter • PVI+CFE = PVI followed by mapping and ablation of complex fractionated electrograms during AF identified by validated software in the 3D mapping system (Ensite Velocity) • PVI+Lines = PVI followed by a left atrial roof line and a line along the mitral valve isthmus with endpoint of bidirectional block confirmed by pre-specified pacing maneuvers Methods – Ablation Strategy CFE strategy Linear strategy Methods – Follow-up • Patients were followed for 18 months • Visit, ECG and 24 hour Holter at 3, 6, 9, 12 and 18 months • Weekly TTM transmissions for 18 months • TTM transmissions every time symptoms felt – Tele-ECG-Card, Vitaphone, Germany Outcomes • Primary Outcome – Freedom from documented AF episode > 30 seconds after one ablation procedure with or without antiarrhythmic medications* • Episodes during initial 3 month “blanking period” excluded from analysis • Secondary Outcomes – Freedom from documented AF > 30 seconds after 2 procedures with or without antiarrhythmic medications – Freedom from any atrial arrhythmia (AF/AFL/AT) after one or two procedures – Procedural time – Incidence of repeat procedures – Procedural complications** – Use of antiarrhythmic medications * TTMs and recurrences blindly adjudicated, ** blinded events committee adjudication Results - Baseline Characteristics Characteristic PVI PVI+CFE PVI+Lines Age - year Male sex – n (%) Ejection fraction (%) Left atrial diameter (mm) 58 ± 10 52 (78) 55 ± 11 44 ± 6 60 ± 9 213 (82) 57 ± 10 44 ± 6 61 ± 9 196 (76) 57 ± 10 46 ± 6 Time from first AF diagnosis (yrs) 4.3 ± 6.3 4.2 ± 5.0 3.6 ± 4.2 AF burden at Baseline* (hr/month) 83 ± 36 85 ± 33 80 ± 37 Constantly in AF >6 months – n (%) 52 (78) 207 (80) 186 (72) 32 (48) 6 (9) 2 (3) 6 (9) 3 (4) 143 (55) 31 (12) 21 (8) 14 (5) 10 (4) 158 (62) 26 (10) 29 (11) 19 (7) 15 (6) 31 (46) 25 (37) 6 (9) 5 (7) 93 (36) 126 (48) 31 (12) 10 (4) 81 (32) 127 (50) 29 (11) 19 (7) Medical history – n (%) Hypertension Diabetes Coronary disease Stroke/TIA Heart failure CHADS2 score - n (%) 0 1 2 >2 Results - Ablation characteristics • 79% of patients presented to EP lab in spontaneous AF • Successful PV isolation obtained in 97% of all patients (all groups) • CFE were eliminated in 80% of patients – 11% not ablated because AF non-inducible after PVI – 9% all CFE could not be eliminated • Both lines with block achieved in 74% of patients – Roof line only 93% – Mitral line only 75% Results - Procedural Characteristics PVI PVI+CFE PVI+LINES p value 166.95 ± 54.83 229.16 ± 83.20 222.56 ± 89.37 <0.0001 Mapping time (min) 13.89 ± 6.64 18.75 ± 14.01 14.38 ± 7.68 <0.0001 Fluoroscopy time (min) 29.35 ± 16.21 42.11 ± 21.70 40.91 ± 24.97 0.0003 Procedure time (min) Results - Primary Outcome Documented AF > 30 seconds after one procedure with or without AAD p=0.15 59% 48% 44% Results - Secondary Outcomes PVI PVI+CFE PVI+LINES p value Freedom from AF/AFL/AT after 1 procedure 49 % 41 % 37 % 0.15 Freedom from AF after 2 procedures 72 % 60 % 58 % 0.18 Freedom from AF/AFL/AT after 2 procedures 60 % 50 % 48 % 0.24 Percentage of patients still on AAD at 18 mo 11 % 12 % 12 % 0.35 * AAD = antiarrhythmic drug Results - Subgroups Results - Complications PVI (n=64) PVI+CFE (n=254) PVI+Lines (n=250) Total (n=568) Access site hematoma Access site arteriovenous fistula or pseudoaneurysm Pericarditis 2 0 3 5 0 3 3 6 0 1 2 3 Fluid overload Sedation related complication Skin burn 0 1 3 4 0 3 5 8 1 0 0 1 Cardiac tamponade Transient ischemic attack or Stroke Atrial esophageal fistula procedural death 1 0 2 3 0 2 1 3 0 1 0 1 Category Conclusions • Largest randomized trial to examine outcomes of catheter ablation in persistent AF • Additional CFE or Lines ablation increased procedural time (may increase risk) • No benefit in AF reduction when additional substrate ablation (CFE or Lines) was performed in addition to PVI • PVI alone achieved freedom from recurrence in about 50% of patients – comparable to published success rates from randomized, multicenter trials in paroxysmal AF
© Copyright 2024