Siranart, Noppachai

ABSTRACT Background Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the mainstay treatment for rhythm control in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PsAF). However, due to the complex mechanisms of PsAF, the efficacy of PVI alone remains modest. Spatiotemporal electrogram dispersion (STED) ablation is a promising strategy to enhance outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of STED ablation plus PVI versus PVI alone in PsAF ablation. Methods A systematic search was conducted to identify studies published up to November 2024 comparing PVI plus STED ablation (PVI‐STED group) versus PVI alone (PVI group) in patients with PsAF. The primary outcomes were AF recurrence and sinus rhythm (SR) conversion. Results Eleven studies (three randomized controlled trials, three prospective cohorts, five retrospective cohorts) involving 1607 patients (mean age of 63.9 ± 9.3 years) were included. The PVI‐STED group was significantly associated with a lower risk of AF recurrence (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.27–0.59, I ² = 25%) and a higher likelihood of SR conversion (OR: 7.04, 95% CI: 1.62–30.62, I 2 = 79%). No significant differences were observed in procedural time (MD: 27.61 min, 95% CI: −29.12 to 84.33, I ² = 97%), ablation time (MD: 4.4 min, 95% CI: −11.3 to 20.0, I 2 = 98%), or fluoroscopy time (0.25 min, 95% CI: −3.4 to 3.9, I 2 = 95%). The overall rate of AEs in the PVI‐STED group was 1% (95% CI: 1%–3%, I 2 = 0%). Conclusion The PVI‐STED approach demonstrated both efficacy and safety in treating PsAF, as evidenced by reduced AF recurrence and improved SR conversion rates.

AbstractIntroductionAtrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) is the most common supraventricular tachycardia referred for ablation. Periprocedural conduction system damage was a primary concern during AVNRT ablation. This study aimed to assess the incidence of permanent atrioventricular (AV) block and the success rate associated with different types of catheters in slow pathway ablation.MethodA literature search was performed to identify studies that compared various techniques, including types of radiofrequency ablation (irrigated and nonirrigated) and different sizes of catheter tip cryoablation (4, 6, and 8‐mm), in terms of their outcomes related to permanent atrioventricular block and success rate. To assess and rank the treatments for the different outcomes, a random‐effects model of network meta‐analysis, along with p‐scores, was employed.ResultsA total of 27 studies with 5110 patients were included in the analysis. Overall success rates ranged from 89.78% to 100%. Point estimation showed 4‐mm cryoablation exhibited an odds ratio of 0.649 (95%CI: 0.202–2.087) when compared to nonirrigated RFA. Similarly, 6‐mm cryoablation had an odds ratio of 0.944 (95%CI: 0.307–2.905), 8‐mm cryoablation had an odds ratio of 0.848 (95%CI: 0.089–8.107), and irrigated RFA had an odds ratio of 0.424 (95%CI: 0.058–3.121) compared to nonirrigated RFA.ConclusionOur study found no significant difference in the incidence of permanent AV block between the types of catheters. The success rates were consistently high across all groups. These findings emphasize the potential of both RF ablation (irrigated and nonirrigated catheter) and cryoablation as viable options for the treatment of AVNRT, with similar safety and efficacy profile.

AbstractIntroductionCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a standard treatment for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. However, there is still a gap of evidence in congenital heart disease (CHD) patients regarding resynchronization therapy.MethodsWe performed a meta‐analysis and systematic review of CHD patients who received CRT implantation. We comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane database from inception to June 2023. Studies that reported response rate to CRT, total mortality rate, change in QRS duration, change in left ventricular ejection fraction, and change in New York Heart Association functional class were included.ResultsA total of 14 studies were included in the study. There were 10 studies that reported response rates after implantation. The overall response rate to CRT in CHD patients was 68% (95% confidence interval [CI] 61%–75%, I2 32%). The response rates in patients with systemic right ventricle (RV), systemic left ventricle (LV), and single ventricle were 58% (95% CI 46%–70%, I2 0%), 80% (95% CI 74%–86% I2 14%), and 67% (95% CI 49%–80% I2 0%). Response to CRT in systemic RV was inferior to systemic LV with an odds ratio of 0.38 (95% CI 0.15–0.95, I2 38%). The total mortality rate from seven studies was 12% (95% CI 8%–18%, I2 55%). The parameters which represented ventricular dyssynchrony improved after CRT implantation.ConclusionThe overall response rate to CRT in CHD was 68%. Patients with systemic RV had a lower response rate to CRT when compared to patients with systemic LV. The total mortality rate after CRT implantation was 12%.

AbstractBackgroundLeft bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has recently become a promising option for the near‐natural restoration of electrical activation. However, the clinical relevance of therapeutic effects in individuals with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and dyssynchrony remains unknown.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception until June 2022. Data from each study was combined using a random‐effects model, the generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird, to calculate standard mean differences and pooled incidence ratio, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsA total of 772 HFrEF patients were analyzed from 15 observational studies per protocol. The success rate of LBBAP implantation was 94.8% (95% CI 89.9–99.6, I2 = 79.4%), which was strongly correlated with shortening QRS duration after LBBAP implantation, with a mean difference of −48.10 ms (95% CI −60.16 to −36.05, I2 = 96.7%). Over a period of 6–12 months of follow‐up, pacing parameters were stable over time. There were significant improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end‐systolic volume (LVESV), left ventricular end‐diastolic diameter (LVEDD), and left ventricular end‐diastolic volume (LVEDV) with mean difference of 16.38% (95% CI 13.13–19.63, I2 = 90.2%), −46.23 ml (95% CI −63.17 to −29.29, I2 = 86.82%), −7.21 mm (95% CI −9.71 to −4.71, I2 = 84.6%), and −44.52 ml (95% CI −64.40 to −24.64, I2 = 85.9%), respectively.ConclusionsLBBAP was associated with improvements in both cardiac function and electrical synchrony. The benefits of LBBAP in individuals with HFrEF and dyssynchrony should be further validated by randomized studies.