CHA2DS2VASc score as a predictor of ablation success defined by continuous long-term monitoring
- PMID: 35917047
- DOI: 10.1007/s10840-022-01326-6
CHA2DS2VASc score as a predictor of ablation success defined by continuous long-term monitoring
Abstract
Background: There are few reliable risk stratification tools for successful atrial fibrillation catheter ablation (AFCA) and most prior studies have used short-term external monitors to define success. CHA2DS2VASc score may be useful in predicting AF recurrence. We investigated whether CHA2DS2VASc score correlates with AFCA success as measured by continuous monitoring via cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).
Methods: Using the Optum® de-identified Electronic Health Record dataset (01/2007 to 06/2019) linked with the Medtronic CareLink™ database, we identified patients who underwent a 1st AFCA procedure following CIED implantation. Success was defined as absence of ≥ 1 h of AF following a 3-month blanking period.
Results: A total of 632 patients (age 67 ± 9.1 years, 73.3% male, CHA2DS2VASc 3.6 ± 1.8, 36.9% paroxysmal AF) were analyzed and included 35.1% insertable cardiac monitor, 28.8% PPM, 21.4% ICD, 13.6% CRT-D, and 1.1% CRT-P. Success at 24 months post blanking period was 40.3% (95% CI 32.6-49.7%), 36.2% (95% CI 26.9-45.4%), and 21.8% (95% CI 14.6-32.5%) for CHA2DS2VASc subgroups of 0-2, 3-4, and ≥ 5, respectively. Median daily burden of AF was reduced to zero regardless of CHA2DS2VASc score, but there were significant differences in survival free from any AF ≥ 1 h between the three CHA2DS2VASc subgroups (p = 0.013). Patients with a score ≥ 5 had a HR of 1.29 (95% CI 1.00-1.67) for AF recurrence compared to patients with a score of 0-2, with similar results after controlling for AF type.
Conclusions: In real-world patients with continuous monitoring undergoing AFCA, only CHA2DS2VASc scores ≥ 5 predicted higher AF recurrence.
Keywords: Ablation; Atrial fibrillation; Monitoring.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Comment in
-
CHA2DS2-VASc: time to settle the score?J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022 Dec;65(3):595-596. doi: 10.1007/s10840-022-01366-y. Epub 2022 Sep 15. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022. PMID: 36107267 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
References
-
- Packer DL, Mark DB, Robb RA, et al. Effect of catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug therapy on mortality, stroke, bleeding, and cardiac arrest among patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA randomized clinical trial. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc. 2019;321:1261–74. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.0693 (American Medical Association). - DOI
-
- Steven D, Rostock T, Lutomsky B, et al. What is the real atrial fibrillation burden after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation? A prospective rhythm analysis in pacemaker patients with continuous atrial monitoring. Eur Heart J. 2008;29(8):1037–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehn024 . - DOI
-
- Packer DL, Kowal RC, Wheelan KR, et al. Cryoballoon ablation of pulmonary veins for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: first results of the North American arctic front (STOP AF) pivotal trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(16):1713–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.11.064 . - DOI
-
- Nielsen JC, Johannessen A, Raatikainen P, et al. Long-term efficacy of catheter ablation as first-line therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: 5-year outcome in a randomised clinical trial. Heart. 2017;103(5):368–76. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2016-309781 . - DOI
-
- Kirchhof P, Camm AJ, Goette A, et al. Early rhythm-control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(14):1305–16. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa2019422 . - DOI
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials
