Efficacy and safety of low voltage area ablation for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundPulmonary vein isolation is the cornerstone of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. However, the recurrence rate of AF after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains high. The efficacy and safety of low voltage area (LVA) ablation in the treatment of AF are uncertain.MethodsThe studies comparing the efficacy and safety of LVA ablation and LVA non-ablation for AF were systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed. Outcomes of interest included recurrent event, procedure time, and fluoroscopy time. Continuous variables were evaluated with mean deviation (MD) and standard mean difference (SMD). Odds ratio (OR) values and its 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used in meta-analysis of binary variables.ResultsFourteen studies were eligible for inclusion. The AF recurrence was similar between the two groups, with no statistical difference (25.7% (67/346) vs. 28% (63/225), P = 0.49). LVA ablation did not increase the incidence of AT (8.7% (20/231) vs. 14.5% (28/193), P = 0.66). Fluoroscopy time was longer in the LVA ablation group (31.4 ± 8.4 min vs. 26.3 ± 7.8 min, P < 0.05). Complication rates were similar between the two groups (26.6% (17/64) vs. 21.7% (13/60), P = 0.53). Patients with LVA had higher AT/AF recurrence (32.9% (213/647) vs. 24.2% (229/948), P < 0.05).ConclusionsPatients with left atrial LVA have a poor prognosis after catheter ablation. LVA ablation did not reduce the recurrence of AF nor did it increase the recurrence of atrial tachycardia.