Objective Catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) is still challenging, no optimal extra-pulmonary vein lesion set is known. We previously reported the clinical feasibility of computational modeling-guided AF catheter… Click to show full abstract
Objective Catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) is still challenging, no optimal extra-pulmonary vein lesion set is known. We previously reported the clinical feasibility of computational modeling-guided AF catheter ablation. Methods We randomly assigned 118 patients with persistent AF (77.8% men, age 60.8 ± 9.9 years) to the computational modeling-guided ablation group (53 patients) and the empirical ablation group (55 patients) based on the operators’ experience. For virtual ablation, four virtual linear and one electrogram-guided lesion sets were tested on patient heart computed tomogram-based models, and the lesion set with the fastest termination time was reported to the operator in the modeling-guided ablation group. The primary outcome was freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias lasting longer than 30 s after a single procedure. Results During 31.5 ± 9.4 months, virtual ablation procedures were available in 95.2% of the patients (108/118). Clinical recurrence rate was significantly lower after a modeling-guided ablation than after an empirical ablation (20.8 vs. 40.0%, log-rank p = 0.042). Modeling-guided ablation was independently associated with a better long-term rhythm outcome of persistent AF ablation (HR = 0.29 [0.12–0.69], p = 0.005). The rhythm outcome of the modeling-guided ablation showed better trends in males, non-obese patients with a less remodeled atrium (left atrial dimension < 50 mm), ejection fraction ≥ 50%, and those without hypertension or diabetes (p < 0.01). There were no significant differences between the groups for the total procedure time (p = 0.403), ablation time (p = 0.510), and major complication rate (p = 0.900). Conclusion Among patients with persistent AF, the computational modeling-guided ablation was superior to the empirical catheter ablation regarding the rhythm outcome. Clinical Trial Registration This study was registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02171364.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.