Out of 69 patients evaluated, a total of 42 patients (Median CHA2DS2-VASC=3 (1-6), HAS-BLED=2 (1-6)) were treated (15 paroxysmal AF, 27 non-paroxysmal AF). [Table 1] depicts general patient’s demographics ablated in this series. The 2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter and Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation[9] and the 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS[8] where applied for patient selection.
Table 1. Patient Demographics
n= |
42 |
|
|
Age (y) |
65 +/- 7 |
Gender (M) |
14 (54%) |
|
|
HTN |
32 (76%) |
DM |
13 (31%) |
CAD |
12 (29%) |
Stroke/TIA |
4 (10%) |
CHF |
6 (19%) |
CHA2DS2-VASc |
median 2 (R: 0-4) |
|
|
LVEF (%) |
60 (40-77) |
LA Diameter (mm) |
48+/-10 |
LAVI (ml/m2) |
34+/-6 |
|
|
Medications: |
|
Beta-Blocker |
26 (62%) |
Ca-Antagonists |
7 (21%) |
Cordarone |
9 (23%) |
Marcoumar |
14 (33%) |
NOAC |
24 (57%) |
no Anticoag |
4 (10%) |
Aspirin |
10 (38%) |
Paroxysmal AF |
15/42 |
Non Paroxysmal AF |
27/42 |
|
mean +/- stdv |
LVEF=Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction, LA=Left Atrium, LAVI=Left Atrium Volume Index
A subset of 17 patients despite paroxysmal AF were not deemed suitable for catheter ablation by the AF HeartTeam and addressed for catheter ablation at our institution. Reason for this was mainly patient choice as these patients presented already with the desire not to undergo catheter ablation. The second reason was the ability to discontinue oral anticoagulation after the thoracoscopic ablation procedure because the LAA is managed. All patients were highly symptomatic and/or had intolerance to antiarrhythmic medications. In addition patient’s choice played an important part in decision-making.[Table 2] shows Atrial Fibrillation characteristics.
Table 2. Preoperative Atrial Fibrillation
|
Paroxysmal(n=15) |
non Paroxysmal(n=27) |
Duration(years) |
3.7 ± 3.5 |
4.4 ± 4.6 |
no Ablation |
15 (33%) |
7 (26%) |
CA 1 |
5 (33%) |
10 (37%) |
CA 2 |
6 (40%) |
8 (30%) |
CA 3+ |
4 (27%) |
2 (7%) |
CA=Catheter Ablations
All procedures were performed successfully. No mortality occurred in this series. Median duration of the procedure was 124 minutes (Range 83-211). Pulmonary vein isolation was successful in 41 patients (98%). In one patient a bleeding occurred during lumitip encirclement of the left pulmonary veins. The procedure was aborted and the patient came back after 3 months for a redo thoracoscopic pulmonary vein isolation on the left side – this time successful. All 42 patients (100%) received a connecting line to the left atrial appendage. LAA closure was successful and complete 40 patients, while one 1 patient had an insufficient LAA closure due to technical problems during application and in one patient with severe adherences LAA amputation with the stapler was not attempted.
All but one patient were extubated in the Operating theatre. One patient showed prolonged effect of sedatives and was extubated 5h postoperatively and discharged to the regular ward the next day.
The first 20 patients spent the first night in the intensive care unit (ICU) thereafter all patients were individually assessed for the intensive care unit or just to transit through the wake-up ward. Median duration of stay in the ICU and Recovery-Ward was 18h (Range 2-72) and 4h (Range 3-48). Chest-tubes were removed shortly after arrival in the intensive care unit /wakeup ward, after chest X-ray Patients were transferred to the regular ward on the same day in some, or on postoperative day one. A summary of the postoperative Outcomes is depicted in [Table 3].
Table 3. Postoperative Outcomes
Outcomes |
Perioperative |
Follow-up |
Sternotomy |
2 |
0 |
Bleeding* |
2 |
0 |
Intubation > 6h |
1 |
0 |
Stroke/TIA |
0 |
0 |
Pacemaker |
0 |
1 |
MACCE |
1 |
0 |
Pleural Effusion |
2 |
7 (16%) |
Pleurodhesis |
0 |
1 |
Death |
0 |
0 |
MACCE=Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Event
Median follow-up was 20 Months (11-43). During follow-up no mortality, thromboembolic events, TIA or stroke occurred. Overall (12 month) freedom from AF and antiarrhythmic medication was 93% and 89% for paroxysmal and non-paroxysmal patients respectively.
In the paroxysmal AF group, one patient had a symptomatic atrial arrhythmia recurrence after 18 month, which required a catheter ablation. This was due to a peri-mitral flutter and a reconnection of the right inferior pulmonary vein. In addition left sided substrate modification and a right sided cavo-tricuspid-isthmus line were performed. Only one patient with paroxysmal AF remained under oral anticoagulants due to an incomplete LAA closure with a CHADSVASC score of 3.
In the non-paroxysmal group overall 5 patients (12%) required a redo procedure. This was due to pulmonary vein reconnection and mitral isthmus flutter. Despite optimal LAA closure 15% of patients remained under oral anticoagulation with NOACS.
This is the first study that highlights the role of an AF HeartTeam Program (AFHTP) in appropriately utilizing both catheter and minimally invasive surgical ablations in the management of AF. Our study shows that AFHTP can yield excellent patient outcomes for patients with improved communication between cardiologists and cardiac surgeons.
Too often, surgeons and electrophysiologists work in silos taking care of the same problem. With increased communication between specialists and increased awareness about quality and outcomes the surgical community has slowly begun to embraces the HeartTeam as it has become evident from the TAVI HeartTeams and team assessment of coronary artery disease.
The results for the surgical approach when randomized to either catheter or totally thoracoscopic ablation demonstrated a high rate of freedom of AF at 12 months, 77 vs. 42% in favor of the thoracoscopic procedure[12]
. Other studies have shown a 2-year success rate of 70–80% for preventing AF recurrence in these complex patients[13]. Furthermore the relatively high complication rate initially described in the FAST trial[12] was demonstrated to become significantly lower in a very recent report by Vos et al.[14]. Over a period of 11 years in a dedicated AF center n=558 patients underwent thorascopic ablations, the freedom from complications was 89% and 97% for complications with life-long affecting consequences[15].
We believe that the surgical procedure comes with some advantages which are: bipolar RF as energy source, large antral epicardial bites isolation, inclusion of the entire epicardial fat pads and the ganglia within the wide antral ablation, and most importantly electrical isolation the LAA by amputation. The importance of this is confirmed by interesting EP data on targeting the LAA during first time catheter ablation[16]. As we have demonstrated, the Atriclip exclusion of the LAA leads to it’s electrical silencing [17].
The most recent guidelines ESC suggest that a dedicated AF Heartteam setting and integrated AF care chain may be crucial for good outcomes[8]. Our’s is the first report of such an integrated care chain.
Anticoagulation management after ablation procedures is directed by the guidelines[8]. However LAA closure plays a crucial role in this setting, as this is done as an add-on to the ablation procedure. Though the interventional cardiology literature suggests that we can discontinue anticoagulation when the LAA is closed[18], after ablation procedures the recommendation is different[8]. Anticoagulation in this setting is to prevent thromboembolism from thrombi accumulating on the endocardial ablation lines due to the transmural nature of the epicardial ablation. However we believe that in the presence of LAA closure the risk of such thromboemboli is lower. There is currently some evidence indicating that the LAA closure line may present a thrombotic surface and that LAA closure in itself might warrant oral anticolagulation during a limited period. Further insight in this matter is necessary. In accordance to the guidelines referring doctors are reluctant to discontinue oral anticoagulation despite documented epicardial LAA closure. In a series of 291 Atriclip patients, Caliskan et al demonstrated that in a sub-group of 166 patients with no oral anticoagulation during benefited from a relative risk reduction of 87.5% with an observed ischemic stroke-rate of 0.5/100 patient-years compared with what would have been expected in a group of patients with similar CHA2DS2-VASc scores (expected rate of 4.0/100 patient-years). This is where endoscopic ablation techniques offer safe[15], effective[12] and durable[13] results, hence providing an additional option in the therapeutic armamentarium of invasive AF therapies. In addition to effective rhythm control, left atrial appendage (LAA) closure diminishes stroke risk and affords the possibility to discontinue anticoagulation. Together, these latter two factors potentially provide improved long-term survival not attainable with catheter ablation alone. This is an important factor in favor of the endoscopic treatment option as the epicardial techniques provide safe, effective and durable left atrial appendage closure[19].
The Star AF II demonstrated an absence of reduction in the rate of recurrent atrial fibrillation when either linear ablation or ablation of complex fractionated electrograms was performed in addition to pulmonary-vein isolation in patients with persistent AF[6]. Based on this and our experience, we believe that obtaining bidirectional block over all pulmonary veins is the cornerstone of any ablation procedure. Isolation from the epicardium, through the fat to the endothelium is done with very effective energy delivery. In fact the only energy source to have proven transmurality is the bipolar clamp [20].
Thoracoscopic ablation could be the first line of therapy due to the nature of transmural lesions on the left atrium leading to a high success rate of pulmonary vein isolation.
From recent studies[21] it appears that up to 20% of pulmonary veins seem isolated when measured with the pen, but when more sophisticated EP tools are used there appears to be a significant amount of incomplete lesions. This again leads to another argument in favor of a combined EP/surgical approach.
Limitations of this study are that we were not able to compare catheter ablation to thoracoscopic ablation. This was not the scope of the work as we believe that these therapeutic pathways are complimentary.