The impact of age on ablation outcomes in AF-mediated cardiomyopathy
Louise Segan,David Chieng,Hariharan Sugumar,Aleksandr Voskoboinik,Liang-Han Ling,Ben Costello,Sonia Azzopardi,Ziporah Nderitu,Ramanathan Parameswaran,John Amerena,Alex J McLellan,Geoffrey Lee,Joseph Morton,Stephen Joseph,Michael Wong,Andrew Taylor,Jonathan M Kalman,Peter M Kistler,Sandeep Prabhu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.16052
Abstract:Introduction: The absence of ventricular scar in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and systolic heart failure (HF) predicts left ventricular (LV) recovery following AF ablation. It is unknown whether age impacts the degree of LV recovery, reverse remodeling, or AF recurrence following catheter ablation (CA) among this population. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of age on LV recovery and AF recurrence in a population with AF and systolic HF without fibrosis (termed AF-mediated cardiomyopathy) following CA. Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing CA between 2013 and 2021 with LV ejection fraction (LVEF) < 45% and absence of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) detected LV myocardial fibrosis were stratified by age (<65 vs. ≥65 years). Following CA, participants underwent remote rhythm monitoring for 12 months with repeat CMR for HF surveillance. Results: The study population consisted of 70 patients (10% female, mean LVEF 33 ± 9%), stratified into younger (age < 65 years, 63%) and older (age ≥ 65 years, 37%) cohorts. Baseline comorbidities, LVEF (34 ± 9 vs. 33 ± 8 ≥65 years, p = .686), atrial and ventricular dimensions (left atrial volume index: 55 ± 21 vs. 56 ± 14 mL/m2 age ≥ 65, p = .834; indexed left ventricular end-diastolic volume: 108 ± 40 vs. 104 ± 28 mL/m2 age ≥ 65, p = .681), pharmacotherapy and ablation strategy (pulmonary vein isolation in all; posterior wall isolation in 27% vs. 19% age ≥ 65, p = .448; cavotricuspid isthmus in 9% vs. 11.5% age ≥ 65) were comparable (all p > .05) albeit a higher CHADS2 VASc score in the older cohort (2.7 ± 0.9 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6 age < 65, p < .001). Freedom from AF was comparable (hazard ratio: 0.65, 95% confidence interval: 0.38-1.48, LogRank p = .283) as was AF burden [0% (interquartile range, IQR: 0.0-2.1) vs. age ≥ 65: [0% (IQR 0.0-1.7), p = .516], irrespective of age. There was a significant improvement in LV systolic function in both groups (ΔLVEF + 21 ± 14% vs. +21 ± 12% age ≥ 65, p = .913), with LV recovery in the vast majority (73% vs. 69%, respectively, p = .759) at 13 (IQR: 12-16) months. This was accompanied by comparable improvements in functional status (New York Heart Association class p = .851; 6-min walk distance 50 ± 61 vs. 93 ± 134 m in age ≥ 65, p = .066), biomarkers (ΔN-terminal-pro brain natriuretic peptide -139 ± 246 vs. -168 ± 181 age ≥ 65,p = .629) and HF symptoms (Short Form-36 survey Δphysical component summary p = .483/Δmental component summary, p = .841). Conclusion: In patients undergoing CA for AF with systolic HF in the absence of ventricular scar, comparable improvements in ventricular function, symptoms, and freedom from AF are achieved irrespective of age.