Table 4

Mid-term procedural results and predictors of procedural failure

Author (year)FUP duration (years)
Mean±SD or median (IQR)
Predictors of relapseMid-term procedural results
Liu et al (2005)140.5±0.2N.A.All patients (4/4) were free from recurrence
Kilicaslan et al (2006)150.9±0.6N.A.52% (14/27) remained in SR after the first procedure; after ≥1 procedure this rose to 70% (19/27)
Gaita et al (2007)161.6±0.8N.A.58% (15/26) of patients with HCM remained in SR after the first procedure; this rose to 62% (16/26) after ≥1 procedure vs 65% (17/26) of patients with secondary LVH and 77% (20/26) with idiopathic AF
Bunch et al (2008)171.5±1.2Uni: LA dilationMaintenance of SR free from AADs was 64% (95% CI 58% to 72%) at 1 year and 47% (36% to 58%) at 3 years
Di Donna et al (2010)18Total FUP: 3.3±0.7
Post last procedure: 2.4±1.3
Uni: older age (>50 years), atrial size >130 mL and NYHA ≥III
Multi: LA volume (HR=1.009, 95% CI 1.001 to 1.018, p=0.037)
NYHA (HR=2.24, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.35, p=0.016)
67% (41/61) were in SR following ≥1 procedure
McCready et al (2011)191.1+0.7N.A.Only 14% (2/14) of patients with HCM were free from recurrence, one after one procedure and the other requiring two ablation procedures
Derejko et al (2013)201.9±1.2Uni: non-paroxysmal AF
Multi: non-paroxysmal (OR=7.7, 95% CI 1.13 to 50, p=0.02)
First procedure success rate was 33% (10/30), and increased to 53% (16/30) after ≥1 procedure
Santangeli et al (2013)213.5 (3.2–4.0)
Post last procedure: 1.3(0.7–1.6)
Uni: long-standing persistent AF (OR=2.58, 95% CI 1.11 to 6.05, p=0.028)Long-term success rate after a single procedure was 49% and after ≥1 procedure 94%
Yan et al (2013)223.3±1.2N.A.SR in 45% (9/20) HCM vs 72% (32/44) controls after ≥1 procedure (p=0.032)
Hayashi et al (2014)232.2±1.2N.A.SR in 53% (9/17) HCM vs 56% (19/34) controls after one procedure (log rank p=0.78) and SR in 82% (14/17) HCM vs 88% (30/34) controls after ≥1 procedure (log rank p=0.35)
Contreras-Valdes et al (2015)24Median: 4.5
HCM 1.8–2.3
Controls 2.9–5.6
Uni: LA pressure ≥12 mm Hg (HR=3.1, 95% CI 1.4 to 7.1, p=0.005) and dilated LA (HR=1.06, 95%1.003 to 1.11 per mm; p=0.04)
Multi: LVOT obstruction (HR=4.3, 95% CI 1.6 to 11.4, p=0.0007)
42.5% HCM vs 70.3% controls remained in SR at 1 year after a single procedure (p=0.005); after a redo procedure this changed to 45% HCM vs 75% controls (p=0.001)
At the end of FUP 35% of HCM vs 67.2% of controls (p=0.001) remained in SR after a single procedure; after a redo procedure this increased to 47.5% vs 73.4% (p=0.005)
Müssigbrodt et al (2015)25HCM: 0.9±1.3
Controls: 1.4±0.6
LA >45 mm in patients with HCM (p=0.041) but not in controlsAfter first procedure: SR in 41% (9/22) HCM vs 50% (11/22) controls (NS), but earlier relapses in HCM (Mantel–Cox p=0.015). After the last procedure, 54% (12/22) HCM vs 64% (14/22) controls (NS and Mantel–Cox p=0.121)
Okamatsu et al (2015)261.8±1.0Uni: duration of AF in months, E/E’, LA volume and LA diameter
Multi: E/E’ (HR=1.16, 95%1.01–1.37, p=0.03)
SR in 59% (13/22)
Wen et al (2015)27Mean: 1.2Uni: LA diameter, QTc
Multi: LA diameter (HR=1.072, 95% CI 1.004 to 1.145, p=0.038), longer QTc (HR=1.02, 1.004 to 1.036, p=0.013); every 10 min (HR 1.227, 95% CI 1.053 to 1.431, p=0.009)
41% (16/39) remained in SR
  • AADs, antiarrhythmic drugs; AF, atrial fibrillation; E/E', The ratio of transmitral Doppler early filling velocity to tissue Doppler early diastolic mitral annular velocity; FUP, follow-up; HCM, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; LA, left atrium; LVH, left ventricular hypertrophy; LVOT, left ventricle outflow tract; Multi, multivariate analysis; N.A., not available; NS, non-significant; SD, standard deviation; SR, sinus rhythm; Uni, univariate analysis.