{"title":"Characteristics of Low-Voltage Zones in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.","authors":"Shuntaro Tamura, Yosuke Nakatani, Jin Soga, Ryutaro Iwai, Hiroshi Hasegawa, Masato Sano, Tadashi Nakajima, Yoshiaki Kaneko, Hideki Ishii","doi":"10.1111/pace.70415","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Atrial fibrillation (AF) frequently coexists with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and low-voltage zones (LVZs) in the atria represent atrial remodeling. However, the impact of HFpEF on the extent and distribution of LVZs and ablation outcomes remains unknown.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To characterize LVZs in patients with HFpEF undergoing AF ablation and evaluate their association with arrhythmia recurrence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 128 consecutive patients (66±12 years) who underwent AF ablation for the first time were retrospectively analyzed. HFpEF was defined as a left ventricular ejection fraction >50% with a history of heart failure treatment or an HFA-PEFF score ≥5. Meanwhile, LVZs were defined as bipolar voltage <0.5 mV and quantified across five left atrial regions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-seven patients (36.7%) were diagnosed with HFpEF. LVZs were significantly more extensive in the overall left atrium in the HFpEF group (16.3±13.5 vs. 8.2±7.6 cm<sup>2</sup>, p < 0.001), with the greatest difference being observed in the anterior wall (5.6±5.4 vs. 2.3±2.8 cm<sup>2</sup>, p < 0.001). During 9±4 months, arrhythmia recurrence rates did not differ significantly between HFpEF and non-HFpEF groups (12.8% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.310). Posterior wall isolation was more frequently performed in the HFpEF group (27.6% vs. 4.9%, p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, HFpEF, age, and persistent AF were independent determinants of LVZ extent.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AF patients with HFpEF exhibit more extensive LVZs, indicating advanced atrial remodeling. Despite differences in atrial substrate and ablation strategy, arrhythmia recurrence rates were comparable between patients with and without HFpEF.</p>","PeriodicalId":520740,"journal":{"name":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.70415","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) frequently coexists with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and low-voltage zones (LVZs) in the atria represent atrial remodeling. However, the impact of HFpEF on the extent and distribution of LVZs and ablation outcomes remains unknown.
Objective: To characterize LVZs in patients with HFpEF undergoing AF ablation and evaluate their association with arrhythmia recurrence.
Methods: A total of 128 consecutive patients (66±12 years) who underwent AF ablation for the first time were retrospectively analyzed. HFpEF was defined as a left ventricular ejection fraction >50% with a history of heart failure treatment or an HFA-PEFF score ≥5. Meanwhile, LVZs were defined as bipolar voltage <0.5 mV and quantified across five left atrial regions.
Results: Forty-seven patients (36.7%) were diagnosed with HFpEF. LVZs were significantly more extensive in the overall left atrium in the HFpEF group (16.3±13.5 vs. 8.2±7.6 cm2, p < 0.001), with the greatest difference being observed in the anterior wall (5.6±5.4 vs. 2.3±2.8 cm2, p < 0.001). During 9±4 months, arrhythmia recurrence rates did not differ significantly between HFpEF and non-HFpEF groups (12.8% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.310). Posterior wall isolation was more frequently performed in the HFpEF group (27.6% vs. 4.9%, p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, HFpEF, age, and persistent AF were independent determinants of LVZ extent.
Conclusions: AF patients with HFpEF exhibit more extensive LVZs, indicating advanced atrial remodeling. Despite differences in atrial substrate and ablation strategy, arrhythmia recurrence rates were comparable between patients with and without HFpEF.
背景:房颤(AF)常与保留射血分数(HFpEF)的心力衰竭共存,心房低压区(LVZs)代表心房重构。然而,HFpEF对lvz的范围和分布以及消融结果的影响尚不清楚。目的:探讨心房颤动消融后HFpEF患者LVZs的特征及其与心律失常复发的关系。方法:回顾性分析连续128例(66±12年)首次行房颤消融的患者。HFpEF定义为左心室射血分数bbb50 %,有心力衰竭治疗史或HFA-PEFF评分≥5。结果:47例(36.7%)患者被诊断为HFpEF。HFpEF组左心房lvz更广泛(16.3±13.5 vs. 8.2±7.6 cm2, p < 0.001),前壁lvz差异最大(5.6±5.4 vs. 2.3±2.8 cm2, p < 0.001)。在9±4个月内,心律失常复发率在HFpEF组和非HFpEF组之间无显著差异(12.8%比13.6%,p = 0.310)。HFpEF组后壁隔离更频繁(27.6% vs. 4.9%, p < 0.001)。在多变量分析中,HFpEF、年龄和持续性AF是LVZ程度的独立决定因素。结论:房颤伴HFpEF患者lvz更广泛,表明房颤重构进展。尽管心房底物和消融策略存在差异,但HFpEF患者和非HFpEF患者的心律失常复发率相当。