Outcomes of adjunct posterior wall isolation in atrial fibrillation patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAlthough pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the cornerstone of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF), several studies have illustrated clinical benefits associated with PVI with posterior wall isolation (PWI).MethodsThis retrospective study investigated the outcomes of PVI alone versus PVI+PWI performed using the cryoballoon in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and paroxysmal AF (PAF) or persistent AF (PersAF).ResultsAcute PVI was achieved in all patients using cryoballoon ablation. Compared to PVI alone, PVI+PWI was associated with longer cryoablation, fluoroscopy, and total procedure times. Adjunct radiofrequency was required to complete PWI in 29/77 patients (37.7%). Adverse events were similar with PVI alone versus PVI+PWI. But at 24 ± 7 months of follow‐up, not only cryoballoon PVI+PWI was associated with improved freedom from recurrent AF (74.3% vs. 46.0%, P = .007) and all atrial tachyarrhythmias (71.4% vs. 38.1%, P = .001) in patients with PersAF, cryoballoon PVI+PWI also yielded greater freedom from AF (88.1% vs. 63.7%, P = .003) and all atrial tachyarrhythmias (83.3% vs. 60.8%, P = .008) in those with PAF. Additionally, PVI+PWI was associated with higher reductions in atrial tachyarrhythmia burden (97.9% vs. 91.6%, P < .001), need for cardioversion (5.2% vs. 23.6%, P < .001) and repeat catheter ablation (10.4% vs. 26.1%, P = .005), and a longer time‐to‐arrhythmia recurrence (16 ± 6 months vs. 8 ± 5 months, P < .001) in both PersAF and PAF patients.ConclusionIn CIED patients with PersAF or PAF, cryoballoon PVI+PWI is associated with a greater freedom from recurrent AF and atrial tachyarrhythmias, as compared to PVI alone during long‐term follow‐up.