Clinical Usefulness of Virtual Ablation Guided Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation Targeting Restitution Parameter-Guided Catheter Ablation: CUVIA-REGAB Prospective Randomized Study
- Author:
Young CHOI
1
;
Byounghyun LIM
;
Song-Yi YANG
;
So-Hyun YANG
;
Oh-Seok KWON
;
Daehoon KIM
;
Yun Gi KIM
;
Je-Wook PARK
;
Hee Tae YU
;
Tae-Hoon KIM
;
Pil-Sung YANG
;
Jae-Sun UHM
;
Jamin SHIM
;
Sung Hwan KIM
;
Jung-Hoon SUNG
;
Jong-il CHOI
;
Boyoung JOUNG
;
Moon-Hyoung LEE
;
Young-Hoon KIM
;
Yong-Seog OH
;
Hui-Nam PAK
;
For the CUVIA-REGAB Investigators
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Research
- From:Korean Circulation Journal 2022;52(9):699-711
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Background and Objectives:We investigated whether extra-pulmonary vein (PV) ablation targeting a high maximal slope of the action potential duration restitution curve (Smax) improves the rhythm outcome of persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) ablation.
Methods:In this open-label, multi-center, randomized, and controlled trial, 178 PeAF patients were randomized with 1:1 ratio to computational modeling-guided virtual Smax ablation (V-Smax) or empirical ablation (E-ABL) groups. Smax maps were generated by computational modeling based on atrial substrate maps acquired during clinical procedures in sinus rhythm. Smax maps were generated during the clinical PV isolation (PVI). The V-Smax group underwent an additional extra-PV ablation after PVI targeting the virtual high Smax sites.
Results:After a mean follow-up period of 12.3±5.2 months, the clinical recurrence rates (25.6% vs. 23.9% in the V-Smax and the E-ABL group, p=0.880) or recurrence appearing as atrial tachycardia (11.1% vs. 5.7%, p=0.169) did not differ between the 2 groups. The postablation cardioversion rate was higher in the V-Smax group than E-ABL group (14.4% vs. 5.7%, p=0.027). Among antiarrhythmic drug-free patients (n=129), the AF freedom rate was 78.7% in the V-Smax group and 80.9% in the E-ABL group (p=0.776). The total procedure time was longer in the V-Smax group (p=0.008), but no significant difference was found in the major complication rates (p=0.497) between the groups.
Conclusions:Unlike a dominant frequency ablation, the computational modeling-guided V-Smax ablation did not improve the rhythm outcome of the PeAF ablation and had a longer procedure time.
