Abstract
Background
Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the primary technique for ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). It is unclear whether adjunctive therapies in addition to PVI can reduce atrial arrhythmia recurrence (AAR) compared to PVI alone in patients with AF.
Methods
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing PVI plus an adjunctive therapy (autonomic modulation, linear ablation, non-pulmonary vein trigger ablation, epicardial PVI [hybrid ablation], or left atrial substrate modification) to PVI alone was conducted. The primary outcome was AAR. Cumulative odd’s ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each treatment type.
Results
Forty-six trials were identified that included 8,500 participants. The mean age (± standard deviation) was 60.2 (±4.1) years, and 27.2% of all patients were female. The mean follow-up time was 14.6 months. PVI plus autonomic modulation and PVI plus hybrid ablation were associated with a relative 53.1% (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.69; p < 0.001) and 59.1% (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.75; p = 0.003) reduction in AAR, respectively, compared to PVI alone. All categories had at least moderate interstudy heterogeneity except for hybrid ablation.
Conclusion
Adjunctive autonomic modulation and epicardial PVI may improve the effectiveness of PVI. Larger, multi-center randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of these therapies.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the primary technique for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) [1, 2]. Adjunctive non-pharmacological therapies including autonomic modulation [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10], linear ablation [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22], non-pulmonary vein trigger isolation [21, 23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36], epicardial PVI (convergent hybrid ablation) [37, 38], and atrial substrate modification [11, 33, 39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48] have been studied for the purpose of reducing atrial arrhythmia recurrence (AAR) after PVI. The objective of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PVI alone to PVI plus adjunctive therapy in order to determine which adjunctive therapies are the most effective for reducing AAR.
2 Materials and methods
2.1 Literature search
Electronic databases, PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, were searched for RCTs evaluating PVI plus an adjunctive therapy compared to PVI alone regarding their effectiveness in reducing AAR by three independent investigators (R.B., M.A., and J.B.). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were used to conduct the literature search and report this systematic review and meta-analysis (Fig. 1). Search terms are listed in Table S1. Searched adjunctive therapies to PVI were ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE), empiric non-pulmonary vein trigger (mitral annulus, fossa ovalis, eustachian ridge, crista terminalis, and superior vena cava) ablation (enPV), left atrial ganglionic plexus (GP) ablation, hybrid (convergent epicardial and endocardial) ablation, linear ablation of the left atrium, ablation of left atrial low voltage areas (LVA), magnetic resonance imaging-guided left atrial fibrosis ablation (MRI-f), posterior wall isolation (PWI), renal denervation (RD), Vein of Marshall ethanol infusion (VMEI), superior vena cava isolation (SVCI), stellate ganglion ablation, spinal cord stimulation, vagal nerve stimulation, botulinum toxin injections, and left atrial appendage closure/excision. We stratified these adjunctive therapies into the following 5 strategies: autonomic modulation, linear ablation, non-pulmonary vein (PV) trigger ablation, hybrid ablation, and substrate modification. Only strategies with at least 2 RCTs were included in the analysis.
All RCTs published in any language from the creation date of the databases through July 31st, 2022 were included. Studies were only included if the intervention(s) patients were randomized to was/were attempted in all patients. If a trial published another set of results after extended follow-up, the most recent published study was included. We allowed for trials to utilize operator flexibility in performing additional lesions at their discretion. Studies were excluded if they were not RCTs, if they did not directly compare PVI alone to PVI plus an adjunctive therapy, and if they did not report either AAR or atrial arrhythmia freedom. Trials that uniformly studied multiple adjunctive therapies to PVI within a single arm or that did not utilize the same PVI approach between control and intervention arms were also excluded. All included studies were independently assessed for internal validity and bias using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions by three investigators (R.B., M.A., and J.B.). Any differences were resolved by discussion until consensus was reached.
2.2 Statistical analysis
Three investigators (R.B., M.A., and J.B.) independently reviewed all studies meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria and performed standardized data extraction. The prespecified primary outcome was AAR of each adjunctive therapy. A subgroup analysis was done for overall strategy, by whether the trial was single-center or multi-center, and by classification of AF (paroxysmal vs persistent). For the subgroup analysis comparing classification of AF, only trials that enrolled either all patients with paroxysmal AF or all patients with persistent AF were included. Analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Version 3, Biostat, Englewood, NJ, 2013. Cumulative odd’s ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for AAR. An I2 value of > 0% and < 30% was deemed to represent mild heterogeneity, ≥ 30% and < 60% was deemed to represent moderate heterogeneity, and ≥ 60% was deemed to represent severe heterogeneity. For endpoints with at least moderate heterogeneity, a random effects model was used, otherwise a fixed effects model was used. A sensitivity analysis for the primary outcome was performed by excluding one study at a time within each adjunctive therapy group to assess whether treatment effect or heterogeneity were sensitive to the exclusion of any one study. Lastly, a meta-regression of the primary outcome using the moderator variables left atrial diameter and year of publication was performed for adjunctive therapies with at least 4 trials and at least moderate heterogeneity. The regression coefficient, 95% CI, R2 value, and the p-value were calculated for each regression.
3 Results
Forty-six studies [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48] were identified that included 8,500 participants (Fig. 1). Some clinical trials had multiple intervention arms, each implementing a different adjunctive therapy. We identified 12 linear ablation trials, 11 PWI trials, 8 CFAE trials, 4 RD trials, 3 GP trials, 3 LVA trials, 3 SVCI trials, 2 epicardial PVI (hybrid ablation) trials, 1 enPV trial, 1 MRI-f trial, and 1 VMEI trial. GP, RD, and VMEI were grouped into the autonomic modulation strategy, PWI, enPV, and SVCI into the non-PV trigger elimination strategy, and CFAE, LVA, and MRI-f into the substrate modification strategy. The mean age (±SD) was 60.2 (±4.1) years, and 27.2% of all patients were female. The mean follow-up time was 14.6 months. Baseline characteristics of patients in each of the trials are listed in Table 1. The most common definition of AAR was >30s of AF or other atrial tachyarrhythmias including atrial flutter. The majority of trials utilized ECGs and continuous rhythm monitoring with Holter monitors or event monitors (Table 1). The Cochrane risk for bias assessment showed that the domain most likely to be judged an unclear or high risk of bias was blinding of outcome assessment (Table 2).
3.1 Autonomic modulation
Eight studies (3 GP, 4 RD, and 1 VMEI) were identified that included 1,253 participants. Adjunctive autonomic modulation was associated with a statistically significant 53.1% relative reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.69; p < 0.001; Fig. 2), and there was severe interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 56.46).
3.1.1 Ganglion plexus ablation
Three GP studies were identified that included 467 participants. Adjunctive GP ablation did not show a statistically significant difference in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.27 to 1.17; p = 0.12; Fig. 2), and there was severe interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 68.91). Both the overall effect estimate and interstudy heterogeneity were sensitive to the exclusion of Berger et al. [3] (OR 0.40; p = 0.001; I2 = 0.00).
3.1.2 Renal denervation
Four RD studies were identified that included 443 participants. Adjunctive RD was associated with a statistically significant 69.1% relative reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.62; p = 0.001; Fig. 2), and there was moderate interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 46.89). The interstudy heterogeneity was sensitive to the exclusion of Kiuchi et al. [9] (OR 0.45; p < 0.001; I2 = 0.00). Meta-regression analysis for left atrial diameter was not done because only 3 trials reported this data; however, studies that were published more recently were significantly correlated with a lesser reduction in AAR with adjunctive RD (R2 = 1.00; correlation coefficient 0.19; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.38; p = 0.05).
3.1.3 Vein of marshall ethanol infusion
One VMEI study was identified that included 343 participants. Adjunctive VMEI was associated with a statistically significant 36.8% relative reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; p = 0.04; Fig. 2).
3.2 Linear ablation
Twelve linear ablation studies were identified that included 1,610 participants. Adjunctive linear ablation did not show a statistically significant change in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.41 to 1.14; p = 0.14; Fig. 2), and there was severe interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 77.49). Neither the overall effect estimate nor the interstudy heterogeneity were sensitive to the exclusion of any study. Meta-regression analysis did not show any significant correlation between left atrial diameter and AAR (R2 = 0.00; correlation coefficient -0.10; 95% CI -0.28 to 0.08; p = 0.27; Fig. S1B); however, studies that were published more recently were significantly correlated with a lesser reduction in AAR with adjunctive linear ablation (R2 = 0.34; correlation coefficient 0.12; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.23; p = 0.03).
3.3 Non-pulmonary vein trigger elimination
Fifteen studies (11 PWI, 1 enPV, and 3 SVCI) were identified that included 2,647 participants. Adjunctive non-PV trigger ablation did not show a statistically significant change in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.08; p = 0.20; Fig. 2), and there was moderate interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 35.65).
3.3.1 Posterior wall isolation
Eleven PWI studies were identified that included 2,016 participants. Adjunctive PWI did not show a statistically significant reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.62 to 1.11; p = 0.21; Fig. 2), and there was moderate interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 43.75). Neither the overall effect estimate nor the interstudy heterogeneity were sensitive to the exclusion of any study. Meta-regression analysis did not show any significant correlation between left atrial diameter and AAR (R2 = 0.00; correlation coefficient -0.09; 95% CI -0.21 to 0.03; p = 0.14; Fig. S1C) or between year of publication and AAR (R2 = 0.00; correlation coefficient -0.02; 95% CI -0.07 to 0.04; p = 0.59).
3.3.2 Empiric non-pulmonary vein trigger ablation
One enPV study was identified that included 105 participants. Adjunctive enPV did not show a statistically significant reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.51; p = 0.36; Fig. 2).
3.3.3 Superior vena cava isolation
Three SVCI studies were identified that included 526 participants. Adjunctive SVCI did not show a statistically significant reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.69; p = 0.73; Fig. 2), and there was mild interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 9.55). Neither the overall effect estimate nor the interstudy heterogeneity were sensitive to the exclusion of any study.
3.4 Hybrid ablation
Two studies were identified that included 199 participants. Adjunctive epicardial PVI was associated with a statistically significant 59.1% relative reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.75; p = 0.003; Fig. 2), and there was no interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 0.00).
3.5 Substrate modification
Twelve studies (8 CFAE, 3 LVA, and 1 MRI-f) were identified that included 2,791 participants. Adjunctive substrate modification did not show a statistically significant reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.47; p = 0.89; Fig. 2), and there was severe interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 77.72).
3.5.1 Ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms
Eight CFAE studies were identified that included 971 participants. Adjunctive CFAE did not show a statistically significant reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.46 to 1.60; p = 0.63; Fig. 2), and there was severe interstudy heterogeneity (I2 = 74.55). The overall effect estimate was not sensitive to the exclusion of any study, however the interstudy heterogeneity decreased from severe to moderate after the exclusion of Elayi et al. [42] (OR 1.18; p = 0.43; I2 = 32.77). Meta-regression analysis did not show any significant correlation between left atrial diameter and AAR (R2 = 0.00; correlation coefficient 0.05; 95% CI -0.29 to 0.38; p = 0.79; Fig. S1A) or between year of publication and AAR (R2 = 0.00; correlation coefficient 0.03; 95% CI -0.11 to 0.16; p = 0.71).
3.5.2 Low voltage area ablation
Three LVA studies was identified that included 977 participants. Adjunctive LVA ablation did not show a statistically significant reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 1.32; 95% CI 0.45 to 3.87; p = 0.62; Fig. 2).
3.5.3 Ablation of magnetic resonance imaging-guided left atrial fibrosis
One MRI-f study was identified that included 843 participants. Compared to PVI alone, adjunctive MRI-f did not show a statistically significant reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.67 to 1.16; p = 0.38; Fig. 2).
3.6 Complications
When analyzing by strategy, there was no statistically significant difference in composite of complications for adjunctive autonomic modulation, linear ablation, non-PV trigger elimination, or substrate modification when compared to PVI alone. However, adjunctive epicardial PVI was associated with a statistically significant increase in complications compared to PVI alone (OR 9.61; 95% CI 1.39 to 71.72; p = 0.04).
3.7 Subgroup analysis
All 46 RCTs included in this meta-analysis were grouped according to whether they were single-center or multi-center studies. Subgroup analysis showed that the odds of finding effectiveness with adjunctive therapy compared to PVI alone was not significantly different among single-center RCTs (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.92; p = 0.01) compared with multi-center RCTs (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.97; p = 0.03; Fig. 3A). There was not a clinically meaningful difference in the odds of finding effectiveness with adjunctive therapy compared to PVI alone in trials evaluating patients with persistent AF (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.97, p = 0.03) or paroxysmal AF (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.09, p = 0.13; Fig. 3B).
4 Discussion
This meta-analysis demonstrated that of adjunctive strategies studied, only PVI plus autonomic modulation and PVI plus epicardial PVI (convergent hybrid ablation) promoted a significant reduction in AAR compared to PVI alone. Collectively, the number of centers and classification of atrial fibrillation did not meaningfully influence effectiveness of adjunctive therapy.
Meta-analyses of studies evaluating adjunctive therapies to PVI such as CFAE ablation [49,50,51,52,53,54], PWI [55,56,57], GP ablation [58, 59], and RD [60,61,62,63] have been conducted. Wu et al. [51] analyzed 11 studies comparing PVI plus CFAE ablation to PVI alone and found that additional CFAE ablation resulted in a significant reduction in AAR. Salih et al. [56] evaluated 6 studies comparing PVI plus PWI to PVI alone and found adjunctive PWI was associated with a significant reduction in both AF recurrence and AAR. Recently, Rackley et al. [59] evaluated 5 RCTs comparing PVI plus GP ablation to PVI alone and found that adjunctive GP ablation significantly reduced AAR. Lastly, Atti et al. [63] conducted a meta-analysis on studies that compared PVI plus RD to PVI alone and found that adjunctive RD significantly decreased the risk of AF recurrence.
Importantly, these analyses either included nonrandomized and observational studies [51, 56, 53] or studies that did not directly compare PVI alone to PVI plus a single adjunctive therapy [59]. To date, there are no meta-analyses that have strictly evaluated RCTs comparing PVI alone to PVI plus adjunctive therapy stratified by class of strategy (i.e. autonomic modulation, substrate modification, non-PV trigger ablation, linear ablation, or hybrid ablation). Whereas Wu et al. [51] and Salih et al. [56] found a significant reduction in AAR for adjunctive CFAE and PWI, respectively, the present meta-analysis did not reveal this significance after incorporating data from the latest RCTs such as STABLE-SR-II [45], DECAAF II [48], CAPLA [31], Ahn et al. [27], and Kim et al. [29]
Autonomic dysfunction and cardiac hyperinnervation play a significant role in the pathogenesis of AF [64]. It is well recognized that PVI by catheter ablation disrupts several of the major intrinsic cardiac autonomic ganglia located on the epicardial PV-atrium interface [1, 65,66,67,68], a process which may be critical for suppression of AF. In fact, GP ablation alone has demonstrated comparable arrhythmia-free survival to PVI with less ablation time in several small trials [4, 69,70,71]. After exclusion of the AFACT trial, adjunctive GP ablation was associated with a reduction in AAR in the present analysis similar to prior studies [59]. Further study is needed to identify the optimal method to detect and target epicardial GP. The AFACT trial, which evaluated surgical epicardial ablation, failed to show a benefit to adjunctive GP ablation [3]. It is possible that epicardial PVI more effectively targets autonomic GP, attenuating the benefit of additional anatomic GP ablation [72]. Interestingly, this concept may explain the success of the convergent hybrid approach. Currently, there are 3 ongoing RCTs evaluating adjunctive epicardial PVI [73,74,75] that will help further clarify the risk benefit ratio of this therapy.
The ligament of Marshall is an epicardial vestigial fold which contains the vein of Marshall, Marshall bundle, and autonomic neural fibers connecting the thoracic and intrinsic cardiac autonomic ganglia. VMEI has been shown to eliminate parasympathetic responses to high-frequency stimulation suggesting it can result in neuronal damage and autonomic modulation/LA denervation [76]. Additional RCTs should be conducted to determine if the success of VMEI [10] for treatment of AF can be reproduced. The Marshall Bundle complex which encircles the vein of Marshall has also been implicated in focal and re-entrant atrial tachycardias which may serve as triggers for AF. Thus, VMEI may also result in non-PV trigger elimination. In addition to GP ablation, VMEI, and RD, additional research should consider alternative methods for autonomic modulation as an adjunctive therapy to PVI including non-invasive therapies such as tragus nerve stimulation [77,78,79,80].
There are several limitations to consider. First, measurement of AAR in the trials studied was not uniform across all trials. The method of AAR detection can influence treatment efficacy estimates. Furthermore, no studies evaluated AAR burden, which may be a more important endpoint to consider when evaluating the success of AF ablation and classification of AF prior to ablation [81]. However, measurement of AAR was uniform for each individual trial, thus allowing for comparison of PVI to PVI plus adjunctive therapy in this meta-analysis. Second, there was significant heterogeneity across all trials. We attempted to address this by conducting sensitivity analyses. In the case of adjunctive GP ablation and RD, these analyses did identify trials, which after removal, resulted in reduction of heterogeneity. For example, the GP ablation analysis was sensitive to the exclusion of AFACT trial [3], which evaluated thoracoscopic epicardial PVI. Third, there were a limited number of RCTs for certain adjunctive therapies. Hybrid ablation had only 2 trials while enPV and MRI-f had only 1 trial each. Importantly, there were fewer studies for the adjunctive strategies associated with AAR reduction (autonomic modulation and hybrid ablation) compared to those which did not improve AAR. Thus, caution should be taken in interpreting results, and future studies are needed to clarify the potential benefit of adjunctive autonomic modulation and epicardial PVI. Lastly, focal impulse and rotor modification (FIRM) was not included in the present study as there was only 1 RCT which met inclusion criteria. However, observational data for this strategy has suggested that there is no significant adjunctive benefit [82].
5 Conclusion
Autonomic modulation and hybrid ablation may improve the effectiveness of PVI. Future work should be done to evaluate strategies minimizing additional ablation of the LA, as this can be proarrhythmic and impair atrial mechanics [83] and in the case of epicardial ablation, increase procedural complication risk. Future studies should also evaluate AAR utilizing long-term continuous cardiac monitoring to allow for calculation of AF burden as well as frequency and duration of AF episodes, which may be more clinically meaningful endpoints.
Data availability
Any inquires regarding the data can be submitted to the corresponding author and it will be addressed accordingly.
References
Santangeli P, Marchlinski FE. Pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation: forever young. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(23):2468–70.
Haïssaguerre M, Jaïs P, Shah DC, Takahashi A, Hocini M, Quiniou G, et al. Spontaneous initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats originating in the pulmonary veins. N Engl J Med. 1998;339(10):659–66.
Berger WR, Neefs J, van den Berg NWE, Krul SPJ, van Praag EM, Piersma FR, et al. Additional ganglion plexus ablation during thoracoscopic surgical ablation of advanced atrial fibrillation: Intermediate follow-up of the AFACT study. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019;5(3):343–53.
Katritsis DG, Pokushalov E, Romanov A, Giazitzoglou E, Siontis GCM, Po SS, et al. Autonomic denervation added to pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62(24):2318–25.
Katritsis DG, Giazitzoglou E, Zografos T, Pokushalov E, Po SS, Camm AJ. Rapid pulmonary vein isolation combined with autonomic ganglia modification: a randomized study. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8(5):672–8.
Steinberg JS, Shabanov V, Ponomarev D, Losik D, Ivanickiy E, Kropotkin E, et al. Effect of renal denervation and catheter ablation vs catheter ablation alone on atrial fibrillation recurrence among patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and hypertension: The ERADICATE-AF randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323(3):248–55.
Kiuchi MG, Chen S, Hoye NA, Pürerfellner H. Pulmonary vein isolation combined with spironolactone or renal sympathetic denervation in patients with chronic kidney disease, uncontrolled hypertension, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, and a pacemaker. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2018;51(1):51–9.
Pokushalov E, Romanov A, Corbucci G, Artyomenko S, Baranova V, Turov A, et al. A randomized comparison of pulmonary vein isolation with versus without concomitant renal artery denervation in patients with refractory symptomatic atrial fibrillation and resistant hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60(13):1163–70.
Kiuchi MG, Chen S, Silva GR, Paz LMR, Kiuchi T, de Paula Filho AG, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation alone and combined with renal sympathetic denervation in chronic kidney disease patients with refractory atrial fibrillation. Kidney Res Clin Pract. 2016;35(4):237–44.
Valderrábano M, Peterson LE, Swarup V, Schurmann PA, Makkar A, Doshi RN, et al. Effect of catheter ablation with vein of marshall ethanol infusion vs catheter ablation alone on persistent atrial fibrillation: The venus randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;324(16):1620–8.
Verma A, Jiang CY, Betts TR, Chen J, Deisenhofer I, Mantovan R, et al. Approaches to catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(19):1812–22.
Sheikh I, Krum D, Cooley R, Dhala A, Blanck Z, Bhatia A, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation and linear lesions in atrial fibrillation ablation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2006;17(2):103–9.
Sawhney N, Anousheh R, Chen W, Feld GK. Circumferential pulmonary vein ablation with additional linear ablation results in an increased incidence of left atrial flutter compared with segmental pulmonary vein isolation as an initial approach to ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2010;3(3):243–8.
Hocini M, Jaïs P, Sanders P, Takahashi Y, Rotter M, Rostock T, et al. Techniques, evaluation, and consequences of linear block at the left atrial roof in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized study. Circulation. 2005;112(24):3688–96.
Wynn GJ, Panikker S, Morgan M, Hall M, Waktare J, Markides V, et al. Biatrial linear ablation in sustained nonpermanent AF: Results of the substrate modification with ablation and antiarrhythmic drugs in nonpermanent atrial fibrillation (SMAN-PAF) trial. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13(2):399–406.
Kang KW, Pak HN, Park J, Park JG, Uhm JS, Joung B, et al. Additional linear ablation from the superior vena cava to right atrial septum after pulmonary vein isolation improves the clinical outcome in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: prospective randomized study. Europace. 2014;16(12):1738–45.
Gaita F, Caponi D, Scaglione M, Montefusco A, Corleto A, Di Monte F, et al. Long-term clinical results of 2 different ablation strategies in patients with paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2008;1(4):269–75.
Willems S, Klemm H, Rostock T, Brandstrup B, Ventura R, Steven D, et al. Substrate modification combined with pulmonary vein isolation improves outcome of catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized comparison. Eur Heart J. 2006;27(23):2871–8.
Arbelo E, Guiu E, Ramos P, Bisbal F, Borras R, Andreu D, et al. Benefit of left atrial roof linear ablation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a prospective, randomized study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2014;3(5):e000877.
Fassini G, Riva S, Chiodelli R, Trevisi N, Berti M, Carbucicchio C, et al. Left mitral isthmus ablation associated with PV Isolation: long-term results of a prospective randomized study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2005;16(11):1150–6.
Mun HS, Joung B, Shim J, Hwang HJ, Kim JY, Lee M, et al. Does additional linear ablation after circumferential pulmonary vein isolation improve clinical outcome in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation? Prospective randomised study. Heart. 2012;98(6):480–4.
Gavin AR, Singleton CB, Bowyer J, McGavigan AD. Pulmonary venous isolation versus additional substrate modification as treatment for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2012;33(1):101–7.
Yu HT, Shim J, Park J, Kim I, Kim T, Uhm J, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation alone versus additional linear ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation converted to paroxysmal type with antiarrhythmic drug therapy: a multicenter, prospective, randomized study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2017;10(6):e004915.
Kim TH, Park J, Park JK, Uhm J, Joung B, Hwang C, et al. Linear ablation in addition to circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (Dallas lesion set) does not improve clinical outcome in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized study. Europace. 2015;17(3):388–95.
Aryana A, Allen SL, Pujara DK, Bowers MR, O’Neill PG, Yamauchi Y, et al. Concomitant pulmonary vein and posterior wall isolation using cryoballoon with adjunct radiofrequency in persistent atrial fibrillation. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2021;7(2):187–96.
Lee JM, Shim J, Park J, Yu HT, Kim T, Park J, et al. The electrical isolation of the left atrial posterior wall in catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019;5(11):1253–61.
Ahn J, Shin DG, Han SJ, Lim HE. Does isolation of the left atrial posterior wall using cryoballoon ablation improve clinical outcomes in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation? A prospective randomized controlled trial. Europace. 2022;24(7):1093–101.
Kim JS, Shin SY, Na JO, Choi CU, Kim SH, Kim JW, et al. Does isolation of the left atrial posterior wall improve clinical outcomes after radiofrequency catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation?: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Int J Cardiol. 2015;181:277–83.
Kim D, Yu HT, Kim TH, Uhm J, Joung B, Lee M, et al. Electrical posterior box isolation in repeat ablation for atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized clinical study. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2022;8(5):582–92.
Pak HN, Park J, Park JW, Yang S, Yu HT, Kim T, et al. Electrical posterior box isolation in persistent atrial fibrillation changed to paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a multicenter, prospective, randomized study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13(9):e008531.
Kistler PM, Chieng D, Sugumar H, Ling L, Segan L, Azzopardi S, et al. Effect of catheter ablation using pulmonary vein isolation with vs without posterior left atrial wall isolation on atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: The CAPLA Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2023;329(2):127–35.
Pappone C, Manguso F, Vicedomini G, Gugliotta F, Santinelli O, Ferro A, et al. Prevention of iatrogenic atrial tachycardia after ablation of atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized study comparing circumferential pulmonary vein ablation with a modified approach. Circulation. 2004;110(19):3036–42.
Dixit S, Marchlinski FE, Lin D, Callans DJ, Bala R, Piley MP, et al. Randomized ablation strategies for the treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation: RASTA study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012;5(2):287–94.
Wang XH, Liu X, Sun YM, Shi HF, Zhou L, Gu JN. Pulmonary vein isolation combined with superior vena cava isolation for atrial fibrillation ablation: a prospective randomized study. Europace. 2008;10(5):600–5.
Corrado A, Bonso A, Madalosso M, Rossillo A, Themistoclakis S, Di Biase L, et al. Impact of systematic isolation of superior vena cava in addition to pulmonary vein antrum isolation on the outcome of paroxysmal, persistent, and permanent atrial fibrillation ablation: results from a randomized study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2010;21(1):1–5.
Da Costa A, Levallois M, Romeyer-Bouchard C, Bisch L, Gate-Martinet A, Isaaz K. Remote-controlled magnetic pulmonary vein isolation combined with superior vena cava isolation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized study. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2015;108(3):163–71.
DeLurgio DB, Crossen KJ, Gill J, Blauth C, Oza SR, Magnano AR, et al. Hybrid convergent procedure for the treatment of persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: results of converge clinical trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13(12):e009288.
Jan M, Žižek D, Geršak ŽM, Geršak B. Comparison of treatment outcomes between convergent procedure and catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation evaluated with implantable loop recorder monitoring. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018;29(8):1073–80.
Hwang J, Park HS, Han S, Lee CH, Kim I, Cho Y, et al. Ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation based on high density voltage mapping and complex fractionated atrial electrograms: A randomized controlled trial. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100(31):e26702.
Oral H, Chugh A, Yoshida K, Sarrazin JF, Kuhne M, Crawford T, et al. A randomized assessment of the incremental role of ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms after antral pulmonary vein isolation for long-lasting persistent atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53(9):782–9.
Di Biase L, Elayi CS, Fahmy TS, Martin DO, Ching CK, Barrett C, et al. Atrial fibrillation ablation strategies for paroxysmal patients: randomized comparison between different techniques. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2009;2(2):113–9.
Elayi CS, Verma A, Di Biase L, Ching CK, Patel D, Barrett C, et al. Ablation for longstanding permanent atrial fibrillation: results from a randomized study comparing three different strategies. Heart Rhythm. 2008;5(12):1658–64.
Oral H, Chugh A, Lemola K, Cheung P, Hall B, Good E, et al. Noninducibility of atrial fibrillation as an end point of left atrial circumferential ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized study. Circulation. 2004;110(18):2797–801.
Vogler J, Willems S, Sultan A, Schreiber D, Luker J, Servatius H, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation versus defragmentation: The CHASE-AF clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66(24):2743–52.
Yang G, Zheng L, Jiang C, Fan J, Liu X, Zhan X, et al. Circumferential pulmonary vein isolation plus low-voltage area modification in persistent atrial fibrillation: The STABLE-SR-II trial. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2022;8(7):882–91.
Huo Y, Gaspar T, Schӧnbauer R, Wojcik M, Fiedler L, Roithinger FX, et al. Low-voltage myocardium-guided ablation trial of persistent atrial fibrillation. NEJM Evid. 2022;1(11):1–10.
Masuda M, Asai M, Iida O, Okamoto S, Ishihara T, Nanto K, et al. Low-voltage-area ablation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation - extended follow-up results of the volcano trial. Circ J. 2022;86(2):245–52.
Marrouche NF, Wazni O, McGann C, Greene T, Dean JM, Dagher L, et al. Effect of mri-guided fibrosis ablation vs conventional catheter ablation on atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: the decaaf ii randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2022;327(23):2296–305.
Waranugraha Y, Rizal A, Setiawan D, Aziz IJ. Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Indian Heart J. 2021;73(1):63–73.
Providência R, Lambiase PD, Srinivasan N, Babu GG, Bronis K, Ahsan S, et al. Is there still a role for complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation? meta-analysis of 1415 patients. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2015;8(5):1017–29.
Wu SH, Jiang WF, Gu J, Zhao L, Wang Y, Liu Y, et al. Benefits and risks of additional ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms for patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2013;169(1):35–43.
Hayward RM, Upadhyay GA, Mela T, Ellinor PT, Barrett CD, Heist EK, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation with complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation for paroxysmal and nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8(7):994–1000.
Li WJ, Bai YY, Zhang HY, Tang RB, Miao CL, Sang CH, et al. Additional ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms after pulmonary vein isolation in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2011;4(2):143–8.
Kong MH, Piccini JP, Bahnson TD. Efficacy of adjunctive ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms and pulmonary vein isolation for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Europace. 2011;13(2):193–204.
Moustafa A, Liu X, Elzanaty A, Meenakshisundaram C, Kancharla K, Kahaly O, et al. Role of adjunctive cryoballoon left atrial posterior wall isolation in non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2022;47(12):101383.
Salih M, Darrat Y, Ibrahim AM, Al-Akchar M, Bhattarai M, Koester C, et al. Clinical outcomes of adjunctive posterior wall isolation in persistent atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020;31(6):1394–402.
Lupercio F, Lin AY, Aldaas OM, Romero J, Briceno D, Hoffmayer KS, et al. Role of adjunctive posterior wall isolation in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020;58(1):77–86.
Kampaktsis PN, Oikonomou EK, Choi DY, Cheung JW. Efficacy of ganglionated plexi ablation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal versus persistent atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2017;50(3):253–60.
Rackley J, Nudy M, Gonzalez MD, Naccarelli G, Maheshwari A. Pulmonary vein isolation with adjunctive left atrial ganglionic plexus ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-022-01212-1.
Mujer MT, Al-Abcha A, Saleh Y, Nerusu LA, Boumegouas M, Herzallah K, et al. Effect of combined renal denervation and pulmonary vein isolation in atrial fibrillation recurrence in hypertensive patients: A meta-analysis. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;43(8):866–74.
Kewcharoen J, Vutthikraivit W, Rattanawong P, Prasitlumkum N, Akoum NW, Bunch TJ, et al. Renal sympathetic denervation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation reduces the recurrence rate of atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis of randomized control trials. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2021;60(3):459–67.
Ukena C, Becker N, Pavlicek V, Millenaar D, Ewen S, Linz D, et al. Catheter-based renal denervation as adjunct to pulmonary vein isolation for treatment of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens. 2020;38(5):783–90.
Atti V, Turagam MK, Garg J, Lakkireddy D. Renal sympathetic denervation improves clinical outcomes in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation and history of hypertension: A meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30(5):702–8.
Chakraborty P, Farhat K, Po SS, Armoundas AA, Stavrakis S. Autonomic nervous system and cardiac metabolism: links between autonomic and metabolic remodeling in atrial fibrillation [published online ahead of print, 2023 Mar 31]. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2023; S2405-500X(23)00117-2
Lange PS, Wenning C, Avramovic N, Leitz P, Larbig R, Frommeyer G, et al. Cardiac sympathetic activity and rhythm control following pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation-a prospective 123i-mibg-spect/ct imaging study. J Pers Med. 2021;11(10):995.
Janes RD, Brandys JC, Hopkins DA, Johnstone DE, Murphy DA, Armour JA. Anatomy of human extrinsic cardiac nerves and ganglia. Am J Cardiol. 1986;57(4):299–309.
Armour JA, Murphy DA, Yuan BX, Macdonald S, Hopkins DA. Gross and microscopic anatomy of the human intrinsic cardiac nervous system. Anat Rec. 1997;247(2):289–98.
Ashton JL, Burton RAB, Bub G, Smaill BH, Montgomery JM. Synaptic plasticity in cardiac innervation and its potential role in atrial fibrillation. Front Physiol. 2018;9:240.
Kim MY, Coyle C, Tomlinson DR, et al. Ectopy-triggering ganglionated plexuses ablation to prevent atrial fibrillation: GANGLIA-AF study. Heart Rhythm. 2022;19(4):516–24.
Mamchur SE, Mamchur IN, Khomenko EA, Bokhan NS, Scherbinina DA. 'Electrical exclusion' of a critical myocardial mass by extended pulmonary vein antrum isolation for persistent atrial fibrillation treatment. Interv Med Appl Sci. 2014;6(1):31–9.
Sandler B, Kim MY, Sikkel MB, et al. Targeting the ectopy-triggering ganglionated plexuses without pulmonary vein isolation prevents atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32(2):235–44.
Michaud GF, Kumar S. Surgical ganglionic plexus ablation in atrial fibrillation: is all hope lost for the plexus? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68(11):1166–8.
Two-stage hybrid ablation or thoracoscopic epicardial ablation for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (THAT-LSPAF). ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03708471. Updated February 11, 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03708471.
Hybrid versus catheter ablation in persistent AF (HARTCAP-AF). ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02441738. Updated May 16, 2019. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02441738.
Comparison Between One-stage Hybrid Ablation and Thoracoscopic Surgical Ablation for Intractable Atrial Fibrillation. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03127423. Updated August 18, 2021. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03127423.
Vlachos K, Derval N, Pambrun T, et al. Ligament of Marshall ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2021;44(5):782–91.
Stavrakis S, Humphrey MB, Scherlag BJ, et al. Low-level transcutaneous electrical vagus nerve stimulation suppresses atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65(9):867–75.
Mircea AA, Rusu M, Liehn EA, Bucur O. Promising therapies for atrial fibrillation and ventricular tachycardia. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(20):12612.
Qin D, Singh JP. Low-level tragus stimulation for atrial fibrillation: a glimpse of hope for neuromodulation? JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6(3):292–4.
Stavrakis S, Stoner JA, Humphrey MB, et al. Treat af (transcutaneous electrical vagus nerve stimulation to suppress atrial fibrillation): a randomized clinical trial. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6(3):282–91.
Andrade JG, Champagne J, Dubuc M, Deyell MW, Verma A, Macle L, et al. Cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation assessed by continuous monitoring: a ransdomized clinical trial. Circulation. 2019;140(22):1779–88.
Romero J, Gabr M, Alviz I, et al. Focal impulse and rotor modulation guided ablation versus pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis of head-to-head comparative studies. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32(7):1822–32.
Nakatani Y, Sridi-Cheniti S, Cheniti G, Ramirez FD, Goujeau C, André C, et al. Pulsed field ablation prevents chronic atrial fibrotic changes and restrictive mechanics after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Europace. 2021;23(11):1767–76.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosures
No disclosures.
Financial and non-financial interests
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary materials
ESM 1
Table S1 and Figure S1 (DOCX 225 kb)
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Bussa, R., Nudy, M., Ahmed, M. et al. Pulmonary vein isolation plus adjunctive therapy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 67, 523–537 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-023-01609-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-023-01609-6