Efficacy and Safety of Adjunctive Substrate Modification During Pulmonary Vein Isolation for Atrial Fibrillation: A...

The efficacy and safety of adjuvant substrate modification (SM; either linear ablation [LA] or complex fractionated atrial electrogram [CFAE] ablation) in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for the treatment of symptomatic, drug-refractory atrial fibrillation (AF), have still not been clarified and need further assessment.

We systematically searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases for studies comparing PVI with adjunctive SM versus PVI alone for treatment of drug-refractory AF.

Twenty-six (26) studies including 3,409 patients (1,975 PVI + SM; 1,434 PVI alone) were included for further analysis. Atrial fibrillation/atrial tachycardia-free survival of patients with PVI + SM was comparable with that of PVI alone (relative risk [RR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.14; p = 0.143). In line with this, the primary clinical outcomes were robust, irrespective of additional LA (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.97-1.18; p = 0.194) or CFAE ablation (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.93-1.16; p = 0.534). Adjuvant SM is associated with longer procedural time (weighted mean difference, 20.72; 95% CI, 10.25-31.20; p = 0.0) and fluoroscopy time (weighted mean difference, 6.66; 95% CI, 1.74-11.58; p = 0.000); surprisingly, it presented similar procedure-related complications as PVI alone during AF catheter ablation (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.68-1.50; p = 0.946).

Adjuvant LA or CFAE ablation do not provide incremental benefit over PVI alone. Although substrate-based ablation markedly prolonged procedural and fluoroscopic duration, there was no evidence of increased risk of procedure-related complications.