RECENT FINDINGS Several r and omized control trials and systematic review s demonstrate the safety and efficacy of atrial fibrillation ablation in patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction .
In multiple trials , these patients have shown clinical benefit from atrial fibrillation ablation including improved left ventricular systolic function , quality of life , and clinical heart failure symptoms .
SUMMARY Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients remains well tolerated with an overall efficacy comparable to atrial fibrillation ablation in patients without heart failure .
There is consistent evidence for the clinical benefit of atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and limited evidence for atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction .
Currently , there is insufficient data regarding the safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage closure devices in heart failure patients
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure experience an increased morbidity and mortality from the hemodynamic consequences of atrial fibrillation and an increased stroke risk .
Consequently , there has been increased attention to procedural alternatives to pharmacologic rhythm control and anticoagulation for stroke prevention .
This review aims to evaluate the evidence for atrial fibrillation ablation and left atrial appendage closure in heart failure patients .
Paroxysmal AF catheter ablation with a contact force sensing catheter: results of the prospective, multicenter SMART-AF trial.
BACKGROUND Catheter ablation is important for treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ( PAF ) . Limited animal and human studies suggest a correlation between electrode-tissue contact and radiofrequency lesion generation . OBJECTIVES The study sought to assess the safety and effectiveness of an irrigated , contact force (CF)-sensing catheter in the treatment of drug refractory symptomatic PAF . METHODS A prospect i ve , multicenter , nonr and omized study was conducted . Enrollment criteria included : ≥3 symptomatic episodes of PAF within 6 months of enrollment and failure of ≥1 antiarrhythmic drug ( Class I to IV ) . Ablation included pulmonary vein isolation with confirmed entrance block as procedural endpoint . RESULTS A total of 172 patients were enrolled at 21 sites , where 161 patients had a study catheter inserted and 160 patients underwent radiofrequency application . Procedural-related serious adverse events occurring within 7 days of the procedure included tamponade ( n = 4 ) , pericarditis ( n = 3 ) , heart block ( n = 1 , prior to radiofrequency application ) , and vascular access complications ( n = 4 ) . By Kaplan-Meier analyses , 12-month freedom from atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia recurrence was 72.5 % . The average CF per procedure was 17.9 ± 9.4 g. When the CF employed was between investigator selected working ranges ≥80 % of the time during therapy , outcomes were 4.25 times more likely to be successful ( p = 0.0054 ; 95 % confidence interval : 1.53 to 11.79 ) . CONCLUSIONS The SMART-AF trial demonstrated that this irrigated CF-sensing catheter is safe and effective for the treatment of drug refractory symptomatic PAF , with no unanticipated device-related adverse events . The increased percent of time within investigator-targeted CF ranges correlates with increased freedom from arrhythmia recurrence . Stable CF during radiofrequency application increases the likelihood of 12-month success . ( THERMOCOOL ® SMARTTOUCH ® Catheter for Treatment of Symptomatic Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation ; NCT01385202 )
RECENT FINDINGS Several r and omized control trials and systematic review s demonstrate the safety and efficacy of atrial fibrillation ablation in patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction .
In multiple trials , these patients have shown clinical benefit from atrial fibrillation ablation including improved left ventricular systolic function , quality of life , and clinical heart failure symptoms .
SUMMARY Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients remains well tolerated with an overall efficacy comparable to atrial fibrillation ablation in patients without heart failure .
There is consistent evidence for the clinical benefit of atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and limited evidence for atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction .
Currently , there is insufficient data regarding the safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage closure devices in heart failure patients
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure experience an increased morbidity and mortality from the hemodynamic consequences of atrial fibrillation and an increased stroke risk .
Consequently , there has been increased attention to procedural alternatives to pharmacologic rhythm control and anticoagulation for stroke prevention .
This review aims to evaluate the evidence for atrial fibrillation ablation and left atrial appendage closure in heart failure patients .