Aims: The efficacy of left atrial posterior wall isolation (PWI) is controversial. Lesion durability may be a major cause of arrhythmia recurrence. The use of the lesion size prediction module improves lesion durability. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone and PWI in addition to PVI (PVI + PWI) in patients with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) using a lesion size prediction module.
Methods and results: This study is a sub-analysis of the recently published prospective multicentre observational study called ALCOHOL-AF (association of alcohol consumption with outcome of catheter ablation of AF). In this sub-analysis, patients with non-paroxysmal AF in whom PVI alone or PVI + PWI was performed using the lesion size prediction module were included. Freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia was compared between PVI alone and PVI + PWI groups using propensity score analyses. Of the 3474 patients registered in the ALCOHOL-AF study, 572 patients (age 65.6 ± 10.1 years, male 77.4%, longstanding persistent AF 25.5%) were included in this sub-analysis. We selected 212 patients treated with PVI alone and 212 treated with PVI + PWI using one-to-one propensity score matching. During the follow-up period, atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence was documented in 92 (43.4%) and 50 (23.6%) patients in the PVI alone and PVI + PWI groups, respectively. Freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence without anti-arrhythmic drugs after a single procedure was significantly higher in PVI + PWI than in PVI alone groups (hazard ratio: 0.452, 95% confidence interval: 0.308-0.664, P < 0.001).
Conclusion: In this hypothesis-generating study, lesion size prediction module-guided PVI + PWI was associated with better clinical outcomes than PVI alone in patients with persistent or longstanding persistent AF.
Keywords: Arrhythmia recurrence; Atrial fibrillation; Catheter ablation; Lesion size prediction module; Posterior wall isolation; Pulmonary vein isolation.
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.