Comparative characteristics of a pacemaker implantation after biatrial or left atrial ablation of atrial fibrillation in combination with coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with ischemic heart disease and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation

Aim To compare the incidence of a permanent pacemaker (PP) implantation based on the chosen treatment technology (biatrial ablation, BA, or left atrial ablation (LAA) for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) with simultaneous coronary bypass (CB). Material and methods The study included 116 patients with long-standing persistent AF and indications for CB. Patients were randomized to two equal groups (58 patients in each). Group 1 underwent BA in combination with CB; group 2 patients underwent isolated LAA with simultaneous CB under the conditions of artificial circulation. Incidence of PP implantation was assessed during the early (to 30 days) and late (to 60 months) postoperative periods. Results For the observation period, a total of 9 PPs was implanted in both groups, 6 in the BA group and 3 in the LAA group (odds ratio, OR, 0.5; 95 % confidence interval, CI, 0.1–2.4; р=0.490). During the early postoperative period, 5 patients in the BA group and 2 patients in the LAA group were implanted with PP (OR, 0.4; 95 % CI. 0–2.5; р=0.438). During the late postoperative period, one (2%) patient of the BA group was implanted with a permanent PP at 30 months of follow-up due to the development of sick sinus syndrome (SSS); also, one (2%) patient of the LAA group required PP implantation at 54 months of follow-up due to the development of SSS. The causes for PP implantation in the BA group included the development of complete atrioventricular (AV) block in 9 % of cases (95 % CI, 4–19 %); sinus node dysfunction and junctional rhythm in 2 % of cases (95 % CI, 0–9 %). Compared to this group, the LAA group showed a statistically significant difference in the incidence of AV block (0 cases, р=0.047). The major cause for PP implantation in the LAA group was the development of sinus node dysfunction in 3 (5 %) patients (95 % CI, 2–14 %). Conclusion The use of BA in surgical treatment of long-standing persistent AF with simultaneous myocardial revascularization is associated with a high risk of AV block, which requires permanent PP implantation in the postoperative period. Total incidence of permanent PP implantation for dysfunction of the cardiac conduction system following the combination surgical treatment of long-standing persistent AF and IHD, either CB and LAA or BA, did not differ between the treatment groups both in early and late postoperative periods.