Anterior mitral line in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation and anterior scar: A multicenter matched comparison—The MiLine study

BackgroundThe benefit of an anterior mitral line (AML) in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) and anterior atrial scar undergoing ablation has never been investigated.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of AML in addition to standard treatment compared to standard treatment alone (no AML) in this subset of patients.MethodsPatients with persistent AF and anterior low-voltage zone (LVZ) treated with AML in 3 centers were retrospectively enrolled. The patients were matched in 1:1 fashion with patients having persistent AF and anterior LVZ who underwent conventional ablation in the same centers. Matching parameters were age, LVZ burden, and repeated ablation. Primary endpoint was AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) recurrence.ResultsOne hundred eight-six patients (age 66 ± 9 years; 34% women) were selected and divided into 2 matched groups. Bidirectional conduction block was achieved in 95% of AML. After median follow-up of 2 years, AF/AT recurrence occurred in 29% of the patients in the AML group vs 48% in the no AML group (log-rank P = .024). On Cox regression multivariate analysis, left atrial volume (hazard ratio [HR] 1.03; P = .006) and AML (HR 0.46; P = .003) were significantly associated with the primary endpoint. On univariate logistic regression, lower body mass index, older age, extensive anterior LVZ, and position of the left atrial activation breakthrough away from the AML were associated with first-pass AML block.ConclusionIn this retrospective matched analysis of patients with persistent AF and anterior scar, AML in addition to standard treatment was associated with improved AF/AT-free survival compared to standard treatment alone. The benefit of an anterior mitral line (AML) in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) and anterior atrial scar undergoing ablation has never been investigated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of AML in addition to standard treatment compared to standard treatment alone (no AML) in this subset of patients. Patients with persistent AF and anterior low-voltage zone (LVZ) treated with AML in 3 centers were retrospectively enrolled. The patients were matched in 1:1 fashion with patients having persistent AF and anterior LVZ who underwent conventional ablation in the same centers. Matching parameters were age, LVZ burden, and repeated ablation. Primary endpoint was AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) recurrence. One hundred eight-six patients (age 66 ± 9 years; 34% women) were selected and divided into 2 matched groups. Bidirectional conduction block was achieved in 95% of AML. After median follow-up of 2 years, AF/AT recurrence occurred in 29% of the patients in the AML group vs 48% in the no AML group (log-rank P = .024). On Cox regression multivariate analysis, left atrial volume (hazard ratio [HR] 1.03; P = .006) and AML (HR 0.46; P = .003) were significantly associated with the primary endpoint. On univariate logistic regression, lower body mass index, older age, extensive anterior LVZ, and position of the left atrial activation breakthrough away from the AML were associated with first-pass AML block. In this retrospective matched analysis of patients with persistent AF and anterior scar, AML in addition to standard treatment was associated with improved AF/AT-free survival compared to standard treatment alone.