Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Without the Evidence of Low-voltage Areas

Pulmonary vein isolation has become the cornerstone of the interventional treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. For the treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation the data remains unclear. All different approaches remain unsatisfactory for the treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation, including single pulmonary vein isolation, targeting endocardial areas of low-voltage, identifying areas with complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE), ablating linear lines such as an anterior line, a roof-line or mitral isthmus line. Recurrence rates are still higher as compared to paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation. Several studies showed a good correlation between the volume of low-voltage areas (LVA) and the burden of atrial fibrillation. Earlier studies that investigated ablation therapy using a substrate-guided ablation as compared to circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI) alone, mostly showed no significant difference in recurrence rates between both approaches. In contrast, some other studies showed better outcomes when targeting low-voltage areas. However, there was significant heterogeneity in patient selection, mapping and ablation strategies and therefore, comparisons are hard to make.

The patients are randomized into three different treatment arms (Group 1: PVI alone if no low voltage areas are detected, Group 2: PVI alone if low voltage areas are detected, Group 3: PVI plus ablation of low voltage areas.

Inclusion criteria

• Persistent atrial fibrillation according to the current guidelines
• Age > 18 years
• Patient information

Exclusion criteria

• Minors