First-line vs Second-Line Catheter Ablation Therapy for Patients with Atrial Fibrillation—Data from a National Multicentre Registry

Abstract

Background

An early catheter ablation treatment strategy is effective for rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In clinical practice, most patients undergo catheter ablation as a second-line treatment, following a trial of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). We aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of AF catheter ablation performed as a first-line vs a second-line approach, based on data from the nationwide, multicentre Israeli Catheter Ablation Registry.

Methods

Following AF catheter ablation, patients were stratified into 2 groups—first-line vs second-line therapy approaches. The second-line group included AF patients who were referred for catheter ablation following treatment with at least one AAD. The primary endpoint was the 1-year freedom from AF recurrence. The secondary endpoints included 1-year hospitalizations, death, cerebrovascular events, and the composite of adverse cardiac events.

Results

The 923 participants had a mean age of 66 ± 4.5 years. Catheter ablation was performed as a first-line therapy in 192 patients (20.8%). Median times from AF diagnosis to catheter ablation were 1.5 and 3 years in the first- and second-line groups, respectively. Patients in the first-line group were younger, had a shorter AF duration, and more frequently had a normal left atrial size prior to the procedure. The primary endpoint of AF recurrence at 1 year did not differ significantly between the groups (24.9% vs 30%, P = 0.205). No significant differences in the incidence of secondary outcomes occurred.

Conclusions

Mildly delayed AF catheter ablation for patients with AF did not compromise the procedure’s efficacy or safety.