Safety and efficacy of ablation index‐guided atrial fibrillation ablation in octogenarians

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundLimited data on the efficacy and safety of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation using an ablation index (AI) for octogenarians is available. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of AI‐guided AF ablation between AF patients aged ≥80 years (Group 1) and <80 (Group 2).HypothesisWe hypothesized that AI‐guided AF ablation could complete the procedure with comparable efficiency and safety in patients aged ≥80 years and <80.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 2087 AF patients undergoing their first AI‐guided AF ablation in our hospital. We compared the atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) recurrence and procedure‐related complication rate between Group 1 (n = 193) and Group 2 (n = 1894).ResultsThe mean age was 83.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 81.0, 84.0) years in Group 1 and 67.0 (IQR 60.0, 72.0) in Group 2. AF type was significantly different between the two groups: Of Group 1 patients, 120 (62.2%) had paroxysmal AF, 61 (31.6%) persistent AF, and 12 (6.2%) long‐standing persistent AF, while of Group 2 patients, 1016 (53.6%) paroxysmal AF, 582 (30.7%) persistent AF, and 296 (15.6%) long‐standing persistent AF (p = .001). Unadjusted AT recurrence‐free survival curves showed similar AT recurrence‐free survival between the two groups (p = .67 by log‐rank test). After the adjustment for AF type, the survival curve was similar between them (hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% CI [0.92–1.65]; p = .15, Group 1 vs. Group 2). The rate of procedure‐related complications was similar between the two groups (3.1% vs. 3.0%, respectively, p = .83).ConclusionCatheter ablation guided by AI achieved similar AT recurrence and complication rates between elderly AF patients aged ≥80 years and patients <80 years.