0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation |

Discerning the Incidence of Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Episodes of Atrial Fibrillation Before and After Catheter Ablation (DISCERN AF):  A Prospective, Multicenter Study FREE

Atul Verma, MD, FRCPC; Jean Champagne, MD; John Sapp, MD; Vidal Essebag, MD, PhD; Paul Novak, MD; Allan Skanes, MD; Carlos A. Morillo, MD; Yaariv Khaykin, MD; David Birnie, MD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Departments of Cardiology, Southlake Regional Health Centre, Newmarket, Ontario, Canada (Drs Verma and Khaykin), Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et Pneumologie de Québec, Québec City, Québec, Canada (Dr Champagne), Queen Elizabeth II Hospital, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada (Dr Sapp), McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Québec, Canada (Dr Essebag), Royal Jubilee Hospital, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada (Dr Novak), London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada (Dr Skanes), Hamilton Health Sciences Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (Dr Morillo), and University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (Dr Birnie).


JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(2):149-156. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.1561.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background The DISCERN AF study (Discerning Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Episodes Pre and Post Radiofrequency Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation) monitored atrial fibrillation (AF) using an implantable cardiac monitor (ICM) to assess the incidence and predictors of asymptomatic AF before and after catheter ablation.

Methods Patients with symptomatic AF underwent implantation of an ICM with an automated AF detection algorithm 3 months before and 18 months after ablation. Patients kept a standardized diary to record symptoms of arrhythmia, and ICM data were downloaded every 3 months. All episodes were blindly adjudicated and correlated with the diary. Asymptomatic recurrences were ICM episodes of 2 minutes or longer with no associated diary symptoms.

Results Fifty patients had 2355 ICM episodes. Of these, 69.0% were true AF/atrial flutter (AFL)/atrial tachycardia (AT); 16.0%, sinus with extrasystoles; 11.0%, artifact; and 4.0%, sinus arrhythmia. Total AF/AFL/AT burden was reduced by 86% from a mean (SD) of 2.0 (0.5) h/d per patient before to 0.3 (0.2) h/d per patient after ablation (P < .001), and 56.0% of all episodes were asymptomatic. The ratio of asymptomatic to symptomatic AF episodes increased after ablation from 1.1 to 3.7 (P = .002). By symptoms alone, 29 of 50 patients (58%) were free of AF/AFL/AT after ablation compared with 23 of 50 (46%) using ICM-detected AF/AFL/AT recurrence. Asymptomatic episodes were more likely AFL/AT and were significantly shorter and slower, with lower heart rate variability. However, the postablation state was the strongest independent predictor of asymptomatic AF.

Conclusions The ratio of asymptomatic to symptomatic AF episodes increased from 1.1 before to 3.7 after ablation. Postablation state is the strongest predictor of asymptomatic AF. Symptoms alone underestimate postablation AF burden, with 12% of patients having asymptomatic recurrences only.

Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00745706

Figures in this Article

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is responsible for substantial morbidity, including disabling symptoms and stroke. Even brief asymptomatic AF episodes can substantially raise the risk for stroke.1 Rhythm control does not necessarily reduce this risk, with 1 trial suggesting increased thromboembolic risk in patients receiving antiarrhythmics.2 This increase likely resulted from withdrawal of anticoagulation therapy when antiarrhythmics appeared to control AF, yet asymptomatic AF persisted. Understanding asymptomatic AF is thus critically important.

Catheter ablation of AF has emerged as an effective treatment for this arrhythmia, with reported cure rates of 60% to 70% for paroxysmal AF after 1 or more procedures.3 The term cure, however, is controversial because most studies determine recurrence rates based on patient symptoms. The incidence of asymptomatic AF is not well described before or after catheter ablation. Current data consist of single-center experiences, none of which have used continuous AF monitoring with an implantable cardiac monitor (ICM). Implantable cardiac monitors with automated AF detection have a very high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of AF.4 Knowledge of the incidence of asymptomatic AF is important for accurate reporting of procedural success rates.

Finally, guidelines state that the primary indication for AF ablation is to reduce symptomatic AF and improve quality of life.5,6 However, remarkably little is known about the mechanisms by which AF symptoms are perceived.7 Features of a given AF episode that might or might not result in symptoms are not well understood8; continuous monitoring may enhance this understanding.

The purpose of this study was to use long-term continuous AF monitoring with an ICM to assess the incidence and predictors of symptomatic vs asymptomatic AF in symptomatic patients undergoing catheter ablation of AF.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a multicenter prospective cohort study. The DISCERN AF trial (Discerning Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Episodes Pre and Post Radiofrequency Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation) was registered, and enrollment occurred from October 22, 2008, to August 28, 2009. Enrollment occurred at the following 8 centers: Southlake Regional Health Centre (n = 14), Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et Pneumologie de Québec (n = 9), Queen Elizabeth II Hospital (n = 7), McGill University Health Centre (n = 6), Royal Jubilee Hospital (n = 5), University of Ottawa Heart Institute (n = 4), London Health Sciences Centre (n = 4), and Hamilton Health Sciences Centre (n = 1). All AF ablation specialists were experienced (>100 AF ablations/y per center). Patients but not investigators were blinded to ICM data. Data were managed by a central, independent study coordination center (University of Ottawa Heart Institute) with a restricted-access database. Written informed consent was obtained before patient inclusion. The study was approved by the ethics review board at each institution.

PATIENT POPULATION

Detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria are outlined in Table 1. Definitions of paroxysmal and persistent AF conform to the guidelines of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force and the European Society of Cardiology.6

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
ICM IMPLANTATION AND ADJUDICATION

All patients underwent implantation of an ICM with an automatic AF detection algorithm that does not require patient activation (Reveal XT, Medtronic). The algorithm4 is based on R-wave detection and analysis of the irregularity of the R-R intervals to define AF. This algorithm has an overall accuracy for AF detection of 98.5%.4 The device was implanted at least 3 months before AF ablation and remained for a minimum of 18 months after ablation. The implantation and programming technique for the ICM was standardized across centers (described in the eMethods).

The ICM data were downloaded at each visit to reduce the probability of memory overflow. Even if memory capacity is exceeded, the device continues to collect total AF burden and episode data (without electrocardiograms [ECGs]). Every ICM event/ECG was adjudicated by 2 independent, blinded investigators (A.V. and D.B.). Episodes were classified as AF, atrial flutter (AFL), atrial tachycardia (AT), sinus, or artifact. Both investigators had to agree independently on the interpretation. In case of disagreement, the event was adjudicated by a third blinded investigator (J.S.). Committee review was planned if disagreement persisted (not required).

PATIENT SYMPTOM DIARY

Patients recorded their symptoms in a standardized diary (eFigure 1). The diary allowed for specification of the time, date, and duration of episodes. Specific, standardized instructions were provided on how to fill out the diary; the importance of entering precise times of symptom onset and offset was repeated at each study visit. Diaries were returned and new ones were issued at each study visit to minimize the loss of diary data.

CATHETER ABLATION PROCEDURE

The catheter ablation procedure has been reported previously9 and is detailed in the eMethods. Circumferential radiofrequency lesions were placed around the pulmonary veins in the left atrium to isolate the pulmonary vein triggers for AF electrically. Repeated procedures were recommended for patients with ongoing recurrences beyond the first 3 months but within 6 months of the initial ablation.

FOLLOW-UP

Patients were followed up at 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 months after ablation, with ECG and 48-hour Holter monitoring at the 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month visits. The ICM data and symptom diaries were collected at each visit.

STUDY END POINTS

Because the ICM analyzes rhythm in increments of 2 minutes, a recurrence was defined as any episode of AF/AFL/AT of 2 minutes or longer. A symptomatic recurrence was defined as an ICM episode of atrial arrhythmia for which correlating symptoms were documented in the patient diary within 30 minutes before or after the start or the end of the ICM episode. All other adjudicated episodes of arrhythmia were considered asymptomatic. The numbers of symptomatic vs asymptomatic days for each patient were calculated using previously published criteria10; any day with AF/AFL/AT lasting 5 minutes or longer detected by the ICM and with diary symptoms lasting 5 minutes or longer was considered symptomatic. If the detected AF/AFL/AT lasted at least 5 minutes but the diary symptoms lasted less than 5 minutes, the day was considered asymptomatic.

Procedural success was defined as the lack of any symptomatic or asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT of 2 minutes or more during the 3 to 18 months after the initial procedure, with or without the use of antiarrhythmics. The first 3 months were treated as a blanking period to allow healing as per the consensus guidelines of the Heart Rhythm Society.11

Secondary analyses consisted of (1) comparison of the procedural success rate as determined by ICM vs traditional symptom-based and intermittent Holter monitoring and (2) examination of the predictors of asymptomatic AF, including episode heart rate, episode duration, daily heart rate variability (HRV), type of arrhythmia recurrence, and interepisode time (defined as the time between 2 consecutive episodes of AF/AFL/AT), all of which are provided by the ICM. Heart rate variability is calculated by measuring 5-minute medians of the ventricular interval in milliseconds during sinus rhythm and calculating the standard deviation of those medians during 24 hours; this value constitutes a known indicator of parasympathetic activity (SDANN).12

SAMPLE SIZE AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

At the time that this protocol was designed, very few data were available to predict the incidence of asymptomatic AF in patients with symptomatic AF. Based on the sparse retrospective data published at the time, we estimated a cohort size of 50 patients targeting more than 1500 AF episodes for analysis. This sample size conservatively estimated 1 to 2 episodes of AF per month per patient for the 21 months of ICM use.

All data are reported as mean (SD) for continuous variables and frequencies with percentages for categorical variables unless otherwise indicated. To examine the predictors of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT, we used the binary linear mixed-effects model for univariable and multivariable analysis to account for the correlations between repeated measures on the same patients over time. Odds ratios (95% CI) were reported. For the patient-level characteristics analysis, we used a multivariable linear regression model with the percentage of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT as the dependent variable. A P value of less than .05 was considered significant for all statistical determinations. The analysis was performed using commercially available software (SAS, version 9.2; SAS Institute Inc).

PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS

Fifty patients were initially enrolled, but 1 patient did not undergo catheter ablation because of persistent left atrium thrombus. One additional patient was enrolled to meet the target of 50 patients. Patient characteristics are detailed in Table 2.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Baseline Patient Characteristicsa

All patients underwent ICM implantation and catheter ablation and completed all follow-up visits. Diary adherence was excellent, with 100% of patients returning diaries at each follow-up and 86.9% of diaries containing at least 1 entry. In total, 5013 diary entries were made by 50 patients, exceeding the number of ICM AF episodes and symptomatic AF days.

ICM EPISODE ADJUDICATION

In total, the ICMs of all patients cumulatively logged 1 933 100 minutes of arrhythmia, of which 1 086 572 minutes (56.2%) was stored as 2355 discrete episodes with accompanying ECGs for adjudication. Classification of the arrhythmia by episode and by cumulative duration of the episodes is shown in Table 3. By number of episodes, 69.0% represented AF/AFL/AT. When measured by duration, 99.5% of the stored episode duration represented AF/AFL/AT. The median duration of artifact recordings was 2 (range, 2-5) minutes.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Classification of Arrhythmia by Episode and Cumulative Duration of the Episodes
AF/AFL/AT BURDEN BEFORE AND AFTER ABLATION

Before ablation, the mean AF/AFL/AT burden was 2.0 h/d per patient. Catheter ablation achieved a reduction in AF/AFL/AT burden by 86% to 0.3 h/d per patient (P < .001). The total number of days per month with more than 5 minutes of AF/AFL/AT dropped from 13.0 to 5.0 per patient (P = .001), and the number of symptomatic days per month dropped from 4.3 to 0.6 per patient (P = .002). Postablation episodes were significantly shorter, decreasing to a median of 6 (interquartile range, 5-40) from 22 (10-202) minutes (P < .001). Heart rate variability also decreased after ablation from 142 (61) to 115 (57) milliseconds (P = .002). Changes in arrhythmia burden and characteristics are depicted in Figure 1.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 1. Data obtained from implantable cardiac monitors showing changes after catheter ablation. A, Before ablation, the mean atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia (AF/AFL/AT) burden was 2.0 h/d per patient. Catheter ablation achieved a substantial reduction in AF/AFL/AT burden whether measured by the duration of stored episodes with electrocardiographic recordings or by the continuous AT/AF counter (P ≤ .001). B, Heart rate variability (HRV) significantly decreased after ablation from a mean (SD) of 142 (61) to 115 (57) milliseconds (P = .002). C, Duration of episodes after ablation were shorter, decreasing to a median of 6 (interquartile range, 5-40) from 22 (10-202) minutes (P < .001). D, Heart rate did not change significantly. * P < .05 compared with preablation values.

ABLATION SUCCESS RATE BY SYMPTOMS, HOLTER/ECG, AND ICM

The mean number of procedures was 1.4 (0.6) per patient, and the mean time from the first to the second ablation procedures was 6 (2) months. At final follow-up, 3 of 50 patients (6%) continued to receive antiarrhythmic therapy (flecainide acetate for 2 and sotalol hydrochloride for 1).

When success was defined on the basis of symptoms alone, 29 of 50 patients (58%) were free of arrhythmia after all ablations. If recurrence was defined as symptoms or as detection of a recurrence by ECG or 48-hour Holter monitoring, then freedom from atrial arrhythmia was seen in 28 patients (56%). If recurrence was defined as any AF/AFL/AT detected on ICM, the success rate fell to 46% (23 patients) (eFigure 2), indicating that 6 patients (12%) had exclusively asymptomatic episodes of recurrent arrhythmia.

Positive and negative predictive values for patient symptoms and intermittent use of ECG and Holter monitoring for ICM-detected episodes of AF/AFL/AT are detailed in Table 4.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Predictive Accuracy for ICM-Detected Episodes of AF/AFL/AT
ASYMPTOMATIC AF/AFL/AT BEFORE AND AFTER ABLATION

Before and after ablation, a greater proportion of AF/AFL/AT duration was asymptomatic. In total, 69.0% of all episodes, or 56.0% of the total AF/AFL/AT duration, did not have any associated diary entry and were considered asymptomatic. A total of 7316 days had more than 5 minutes of AF/AFL/AT, of which 71.0% were asymptomatic. One hundred sixty days (2.2%) had documented diary symptoms but no detection of arrhythmia by the ICM.

The proportion of episodes that were asymptomatic increased from 52.0% before to 79.0% after ablation (P = .002; Figure 2). The ratio of asymptomatic to symptomatic AF episodes increased from 1.1 before to 3.7 after ablation. The proportion of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT duration increased from 36.0% before to 68.0% after ablation (P < .001). The number of arrhythmia days that were asymptomatic also increased a similar amount from 58.0% before ablation to 77.0% after ablation (P = .003). Most patients with asymptomatic arrhythmia episodes after ablation also had symptomatic episodes (6 [12%] had exclusively asymptomatic episodes after ablation).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. The percentage of asymptomatic atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia (AF/AFL/AT) in patients before and after ablation. Whether measured by the percentage of AF/AFL/AT episodes, the total duration of the episodes, or the percentage of asymptomatic days, the percentage of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT significantly increases after ablation (P < .005 for all). * P < .05 compared with preablation values.

PREDICTORS OF ASYMPTOMATIC AF/AFL/AT

Arrhythmia events after ablation were 3 times more likely to be asymptomatic compared with preablation episodes, and the postablation state was the strongest predictor of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT by univariable analysis (odds ratio, 3.19 [95% CI, 2.53-4.01]; P < .001) (Table 5). The number of AFL/AT episodes (P < .001) and the number of episodes without antiarrhythmics/ β-blockers (P < .001), with lower HRV (P < .001), and with a lower heart rate (P = .003) were also more likely to be asymptomatic (Table 5). The number of patients using specific medications before and after ablation is detailed in the eTable. We found a trend toward a shorter duration predicting asymptomatic episodes (P = .05), and interepisode time did not have any significant impact (Table 5). Although procedural success varied from site to site, the success rates of individual sites were not significant predictors of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT (odds ratio, 1.18 [95% CI, 0.90-1.55]; P = .21) (eFigure 3).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 5. Characteristics of Asymptomatic vs Symptomatic Episodes of AF/AFL/AT

By multivariable analysis, the postablation state remained the strongest independent predictor of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT (Table 6). Episodes of AFL/AT, lower HRV, lower heart rate, and shorter episode duration were also significant (Table 6). No patient characteristics were significant predictors of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT, specifically age (β = 0.61; P = .27), female sex (β = −2.12; P = .87), paroxysmal vs persistent AF (β = −3.45; P = .78), the presence of hypertension (β = −3.23; P = .78), duration of AF history (β = −0.10; P = .14), and left atrium size (β = 0.03; P = .98).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 6. Multivariable Analysis for Predictors of Asymptomatic Episodes of AF/AFL/AT

To our knowledge, this study is the first prospective multicenter study to examine the incidence and predictors of asymptomatic AF after ablation using continuous ICM monitoring. Although ablation significantly reduces the burden of AF, the proportion of asymptomatic AF episodes increases. Asymptomatic episodes were more likely to be AFL/AT, were slower and shorter, and had lower HRV. The use of antiarrhythmics and the rate of individual site success did not predict asymptomatic AF independently. However, the postablation state was the strongest independent predictor of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT. Consequently, procedural success is overestimated by patient symptoms, even when combined with intermittent Holter monitoring, with 12% of patients having exclusively asymptomatic recurrence. Our findings suggest that caution should be exercised before stopping oral anticoagulation therapy after ablation and emphasize the need for ongoing continuous monitoring.

Long-term continuous monitoring of AF should be able to detect more AF compared with symptom reporting or intermittent monitoring.10 However, the few single-center studies examining asymptomatic AF after ablation show mixed results based mostly on intermittent monitoring. Three studies demonstrated an excellent correlation between symptoms and AF detected by transtelephonic monitoring or a permanent pacemaker,1315 but they were limited by short follow-up and the limited ability of older algorithms on pacemakers to detect AF. In contrast, other studies have shown incidences of asymptomatic AF ranging from 5% to 44% of patients,1619 but only 1 study used continuous ICM monitoring.20 Unfortunately, that study did not report patient success rate or the incidence of exclusively asymptomatic recurrences.

Our study is the only multicenter, prospective, long-term study to assess asymptomatic AF recurrence after ablation using continuous monitoring. Symptoms, intermittent Holter monitoring, and ECGs had poor predictive accuracy for AF episodes detected by the ICM. Despite 10 000 hours of external monitoring, only 1 additional patient failure was detected compared with symptoms alone. In contrast, ICM detected 12% of patients with purely asymptomatic AF. Two prior single-center studies demonstrated even higher rates of purely asymptomatic AF (37%-44%),16,17 but they used only intermittent monitoring and were performed when definitive demonstration of pulmonary vein isolation was not a prerequisite for ablation. The lack of complete isolation may have increased the incidence of asymptomatic arrhythmia.

We do not know why symptoms of AF vary tremendously between patients. This study is the first to systematically examine the effect of AF episode characteristics on symptoms. The postablation state was the strongest predictor of asymptomatic AF. One explanation may be a change in autonomic innervation after ablation. Reduced HRV is an indicator of lower vagal tone, and lower HRV was also a predictor of fewer symptoms. However, the postablation state remained an independent predictor of asymptomatic AF even after correcting for HRV, suggesting changes that might not be detected by HRV alone. One also cannot rule out the possibility of a placebo effect after ablation, and recent studies have reported that improvement in quality of life may be independent of procedural success.21,22 However, overall arrhythmia burden was substantially reduced by ablation in this study.

This study is, to our knowledge, the first to show that episode duration affects symptoms, with asymptomatic AF episodes being significantly shorter. Slower heart rate also predicted asymptomatic episodes. Heart rate control has always been assumed to affect AF symptoms and quality of life, but prior studies have shown mixed results.2325 None of those studies had the ability to assess the effect of heart rate on individual episodes of arrhythmia. In addition, AF was more likely to be symptomatic compared with AFL/AT. Perhaps the irregularity of rhythm during AF makes it more likely to be perceived, but this contrasts with anecdotal evidence that postablation AFL is typically symptomatic. With so few AFL/AT episodes in our preablation data set, no definitive conclusions can be made.

Procedural success rate and the use of antiarrhythmics have also been suggested as important contributors to patient symptoms.17 Inadequate ablation may create asymptomatic recurrence. Antiarrhythmics or β-blockers may also blunt patient perception of arrhythmia. Site-specific success rates and the presence of drugs were not found to predict symptoms independently in this study.

Previous studies have shown that patient factors associated with more symptoms include female sex,26 paroxysmal AF,27 younger age,28 and negative emotions.26,29 We did not find any patient-level variable to be predictive of symptoms, but our study was underpowered to examine this question.

Our study has limitations. The definition of asymptomatic arrhythmia episodes was based on patient diary entries, and we cannot ensure that patients were 100% adherent in completing their diaries. However, 87% of diaries contained at least 1 entry at each follow-up, and the total number of diary entries exceeded the numbers of ICM AF episodes and symptomatic AF days. We found no significant decline in diary entries over time (9-18 months after ablation). The ICM had only the AF detection algorithm turned on, whereas when the AT detection was turned off; AT episodes may have been missed. However, prior data have shown that more than 55% of ATs have enough irregularity to be detected by the AF algorithm.30 The AT detection algorithm results in a very high false-positive rate of sinus tachycardia detection, which would have substantially overestimated AF/AFL/AT burden and likely the proportion of asymptomatic atrial arrhythmia in our study.

In conclusion, the ratio of asymptomatic to symptomatic AF episodes increased from 1.1 before to 3.7 after ablation. The strongest predictor of asymptomatic AF was the postablation state. Symptoms alone underestimate AF burden after ablation, with 12% of patients having asymptomatic recurrences only.

Correspondence: Atul Verma, MD, FRCPC, Southlake Regional Health Centre, 105-712 Davis Dr, Newmarket, ON L3Y 8C3, Canada (atul.verma@utoronto.ca).

Accepted for Publication: September 24, 2012.

Published Online: December 24, 2012. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.1561

Author Contributions: Drs Verma and Birnie served as coprincipal investigators, had full access to all the data in the study, and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: Verma, Essebag, Skanes, Morillo, Khaykin, and Birnie. Acquisition of data: Verma, Champagne, Sapp, Essebag, Novak, Skanes, Khaykin, and Birnie. Analysis and interpretation of data: Verma, Champagne, Sapp, Essebag, Skanes, Morillo, Khaykin, and Birnie. Drafting of the manuscript: Verma, Sapp, Essebag, Skanes, and Birnie. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Verma, Champagne, Sapp, Essebag, Novak, Skanes, Morillo, Khaykin, and Birnie. Statistical analysis: Verma and Birnie. Obtained funding: Verma. Administrative, technical, or material support: Champagne, Khaykin, and Birnie. Study supervision: Verma, Champagne, Sapp, Essebag, Khaykin, and Birnie.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Verma received consultancy fees from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, and St Jude Medical and research grants from Biosense Webster and St Jude Medical. Dr Sapp received research funding from the Canadian Institute for Health Research and St Jude Medical. Dr Essebag received consultancy fees and research funding from Medtronic of Canada. Dr Skanes received consultancy fees from Biosense Webster, Medtronic, and Sanofi and a research grant from Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Morillo received consultancy fees from Medtronic and St Jude Medical and research funding from Biosense Webster. Dr Khaykin received consultancy fees from Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, and St Jude Medical.

Funding/Support: The study was supported by a research grant from Medtronic of Canada Inc.

Role of the Sponsors: The sponsor played no part in the design, execution, or analysis of the study. The final manuscript underwent a technical review to ensure accuracy of the description of the implantable cardiac monitor; otherwise, the sponsor had no input into the final manuscript content.

Additional Contributions: George Wells, PhD, and Li Chen, MSc, of the Cardiovascular Research Methods Centre of the University of Ottawa Heart Institute, provided statistical analysis and support, without receiving any compensation for their assistance. This study was investigator initiated. University of Ottawa Heart Institute served as the study sponsor and coordinating center.

Healey JS, Connolly SJ, Gold MR,  et al; ASSERT Investigators.  Subclinical atrial fibrillation and the risk of stroke.  N Engl J Med. 2012;366(2):120-129
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP,  et al; Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Investigators.  A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation.  N Engl J Med. 2002;347(23):1825-1833
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Verma A, Marrouche NF, Natale A. Pulmonary vein antrum isolation: intracardiac echocardiography-guided technique.  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2004;15(11):1335-1340
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hindricks G, Pokushalov E, Urban L,  et al.  Performance of a new leadless implantable cardiac monitor in detecting and quantifying atrial fibrillation: results of the XPECT trial.  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2010;3(2):141-147
Link to Article
Verma A, Macle L, Cox J, Skanes AC.CCS Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Committee.  Canadian Cardiovascular Society atrial fibrillation guidelines 2010: catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter.  Can J Cardiol. 2011;27(1):60-66
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fuster V, Rydén LE, Cannom DS,  et al; American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines; European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines; European Heart Rhythm Association; Heart Rhythm Society.  ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2001 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation): developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Rhythm Society.  Circulation. 2006;114(7):e257-e354
PubMed  |  Link to Article   |  Link to Article
Rho RW, Page RL. Asymptomatic atrial fibrillation.  Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2005;48(2):79-87
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Page RL, Wilkinson WE, Clair WK, McCarthy EA, Pritchett EL. Asymptomatic arrhythmias in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia.  Circulation. 1994;89(1):224-227
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Verma A, Mantovan R, Macle L,  et al.  Substrate and Trigger Ablation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation (STAR AF): a randomized, multicentre, international trial.  Eur Heart J. 2010;31(11):1344-1356
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ziegler PD, Koehler JL, Mehra R. Comparison of continuous versus intermittent monitoring of atrial arrhythmias.  Heart Rhythm. 2006;3(12):1445-1452
Link to Article
Heart Rhythm Society; European Heart Rhythm Association; European Cardiac Arrhythmia Society; American College of Cardiology; American Heart Association; Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Calkins H, Brugada J, Packer DL,  et al.  HRS/EHRA/ECAS expert Consensus Statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: recommendations for personnel, policy, procedures and follow-up: a report of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) Task Force on Catheter and Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation.  Heart Rhythm. 2007;4(6):816-861
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Stein PK. Assessing heart rate variability from real-world Holter reports.  Card Electrophysiol Rev. 2002;6(3):239-244
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Verma A, Minor S, Kilicaslan F,  et al.  Incidence of atrial arrhythmias detected by permanent pacemakers (PPM) post-pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI) for atrial fibrillation (AF): correlation with symptomatic recurrence.  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2007;18(6):601-606
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Steven D, Rostock T, Lutomsky B,  et al.  What is the real atrial fibrillation burden after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation? a prospective rhythm analysis in pacemaker patients with continuous atrial monitoring.  Eur Heart J. 2008;29(8):1037-1042
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Oral H, Veerareddy S, Good E,  et al.  Prevalence of asymptomatic recurrences of atrial fibrillation after successful radiofrequency catheter ablation.  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2004;15(8):920-924
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pontoppidan J, Nielsen JC, Poulsen SH, Hansen PS. Symptomatic and asymptomatic atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein ablation and the impact on quality of life.  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2009;32(6):717-726
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hindricks G, Piorkowski C, Tanner H,  et al.  Perception of atrial fibrillation before and after radiofrequency catheter ablation: relevance of asymptomatic arrhythmia recurrence.  Circulation. 2005;112(3):307-313
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Senatore G, Stabile G, Bertaglia E,  et al.  Role of transtelephonic electrocardiographic monitoring in detecting short-term arrhythmia recurrences after radiofrequency ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45(6):873-876
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Neumann T, Erdogan A, Dill T,  et al.  Asymptomatic recurrences of atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isolation.  Europace. 2006;8(7):495-498
Link to Article
Hanke T, Charitos EI, Stierle U,  et al.  Twenty-four–hour Holter monitor follow-up does not provide accurate heart rhythm status after surgical atrial fibrillation ablation therapy: up to 12 months experience with a novel permanently implantable heart rhythm monitor device.  Circulation. 2009;120(11):(suppl)  S177-S184
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fichtner S, Deisenhofer I, Kindsmüller S,  et al.  Prospective assessment of short- and long-term quality of life after ablation for atrial fibrillation.  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012;23(2):121-127
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wokhlu A, Monahan KH, Hodge DO,  et al.  Long-term quality of life after ablation of atrial fibrillation: the impact of recurrence, symptom relief, and placebo effect.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(21):2308-2316
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cooper HA, Bloomfield DA, Bush DE,  et al; AFFIRM Investigators.  Relation between achieved heart rate and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (from the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management [AFFIRM] Study).  Am J Cardiol. 2004;93(10):1247-1253
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Groenveld HF, Crijns HJ, Van den Berg MP,  et al; RACE II Investigators.  The effect of rate control on quality of life in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation: data from the RACE II (Rate Control Efficacy in Permanent Atrial Fibrillation II) study.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(17):1795-1803
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Levy T, Walker S, Mason M,  et al.  Importance of rate control or rate regulation for improving exercise capacity and quality of life in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and normal left ventricular function: a randomised controlled study.  Heart. 2001;85(2):171-178
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Paquette M, Roy D, Talajic M,  et al.  Role of gender and personality on quality-of-life impairment in intermittent atrial fibrillation.  Am J Cardiol. 2000;86(7):764-768
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jenkins LS, Brodsky M, Schron E,  et al.  Quality of life in atrial fibrillation: the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study.  Am Heart J. 2005;149(1):112-120
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Reynolds MR, Lavelle T, Essebag V, Cohen DJ, Zimetbaum P. Influence of age, sex, and atrial fibrillation recurrence on quality of life outcomes in a population of patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation: the Fibrillation Registry Assessing Costs, Therapies, Adverse Events and Lifestyle (FRACTAL) Study.  Am Heart J. 2006;152(6):1097-1103
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sears SF, Serber ER, Alvarez LG, Schwartzman DS, Hoyt RH, Ujhelyi MR. Understanding atrial symptom reports: objective versus subjective predictors.  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2005;28(8):801-807
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sarkar S, Ritscher D, Mehra R. A detector for a chronic implantable atrial tachyarrhythmia monitor.  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2008;55(3):1219-1224
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 1. Data obtained from implantable cardiac monitors showing changes after catheter ablation. A, Before ablation, the mean atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia (AF/AFL/AT) burden was 2.0 h/d per patient. Catheter ablation achieved a substantial reduction in AF/AFL/AT burden whether measured by the duration of stored episodes with electrocardiographic recordings or by the continuous AT/AF counter (P ≤ .001). B, Heart rate variability (HRV) significantly decreased after ablation from a mean (SD) of 142 (61) to 115 (57) milliseconds (P = .002). C, Duration of episodes after ablation were shorter, decreasing to a median of 6 (interquartile range, 5-40) from 22 (10-202) minutes (P < .001). D, Heart rate did not change significantly. * P < .05 compared with preablation values.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. The percentage of asymptomatic atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia (AF/AFL/AT) in patients before and after ablation. Whether measured by the percentage of AF/AFL/AT episodes, the total duration of the episodes, or the percentage of asymptomatic days, the percentage of asymptomatic AF/AFL/AT significantly increases after ablation (P < .005 for all). * P < .05 compared with preablation values.

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Baseline Patient Characteristicsa
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Classification of Arrhythmia by Episode and Cumulative Duration of the Episodes
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Predictive Accuracy for ICM-Detected Episodes of AF/AFL/AT
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 5. Characteristics of Asymptomatic vs Symptomatic Episodes of AF/AFL/AT
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 6. Multivariable Analysis for Predictors of Asymptomatic Episodes of AF/AFL/AT

References

Healey JS, Connolly SJ, Gold MR,  et al; ASSERT Investigators.  Subclinical atrial fibrillation and the risk of stroke.  N Engl J Med. 2012;366(2):120-129
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP,  et al; Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Investigators.  A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation.  N Engl J Med. 2002;347(23):1825-1833
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Verma A, Marrouche NF, Natale A. Pulmonary vein antrum isolation: intracardiac echocardiography-guided technique.  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2004;15(11):1335-1340
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hindricks G, Pokushalov E, Urban L,  et al.  Performance of a new leadless implantable cardiac monitor in detecting and quantifying atrial fibrillation: results of the XPECT trial.  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2010;3(2):141-147
Link to Article
Verma A, Macle L, Cox J, Skanes AC.CCS Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Committee.  Canadian Cardiovascular Society atrial fibrillation guidelines 2010: catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter.  Can J Cardiol. 2011;27(1):60-66
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fuster V, Rydén LE, Cannom DS,  et al; American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines; European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines; European Heart Rhythm Association; Heart Rhythm Society.  ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2001 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation): developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Rhythm Society.  Circulation. 2006;114(7):e257-e354
PubMed  |  Link to Article   |  Link to Article
Rho RW, Page RL. Asymptomatic atrial fibrillation.  Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2005;48(2):79-87
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Page RL, Wilkinson WE, Clair WK, McCarthy EA, Pritchett EL. Asymptomatic arrhythmias in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia.  Circulation. 1994;89(1):224-227
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Verma A, Mantovan R, Macle L,  et al.  Substrate and Trigger Ablation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation (STAR AF): a randomized, multicentre, international trial.  Eur Heart J. 2010;31(11):1344-1356
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ziegler PD, Koehler JL, Mehra R. Comparison of continuous versus intermittent monitoring of atrial arrhythmias.  Heart Rhythm. 2006;3(12):1445-1452
Link to Article
Heart Rhythm Society; European Heart Rhythm Association; European Cardiac Arrhythmia Society; American College of Cardiology; American Heart Association; Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Calkins H, Brugada J, Packer DL,  et al.  HRS/EHRA/ECAS expert Consensus Statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: recommendations for personnel, policy, procedures and follow-up: a report of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) Task Force on Catheter and Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation.  Heart Rhythm. 2007;4(6):816-861
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Stein PK. Assessing heart rate variability from real-world Holter reports.  Card Electrophysiol Rev. 2002;6(3):239-244
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Verma A, Minor S, Kilicaslan F,  et al.  Incidence of atrial arrhythmias detected by permanent pacemakers (PPM) post-pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI) for atrial fibrillation (AF): correlation with symptomatic recurrence.  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2007;18(6):601-606
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Steven D, Rostock T, Lutomsky B,  et al.  What is the real atrial fibrillation burden after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation? a prospective rhythm analysis in pacemaker patients with continuous atrial monitoring.  Eur Heart J. 2008;29(8):1037-1042
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Oral H, Veerareddy S, Good E,  et al.  Prevalence of asymptomatic recurrences of atrial fibrillation after successful radiofrequency catheter ablation.  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2004;15(8):920-924
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pontoppidan J, Nielsen JC, Poulsen SH, Hansen PS. Symptomatic and asymptomatic atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein ablation and the impact on quality of life.  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2009;32(6):717-726
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hindricks G, Piorkowski C, Tanner H,  et al.  Perception of atrial fibrillation before and after radiofrequency catheter ablation: relevance of asymptomatic arrhythmia recurrence.  Circulation. 2005;112(3):307-313
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Senatore G, Stabile G, Bertaglia E,  et al.  Role of transtelephonic electrocardiographic monitoring in detecting short-term arrhythmia recurrences after radiofrequency ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45(6):873-876
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Neumann T, Erdogan A, Dill T,  et al.  Asymptomatic recurrences of atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isolation.  Europace. 2006;8(7):495-498
Link to Article
Hanke T, Charitos EI, Stierle U,  et al.  Twenty-four–hour Holter monitor follow-up does not provide accurate heart rhythm status after surgical atrial fibrillation ablation therapy: up to 12 months experience with a novel permanently implantable heart rhythm monitor device.  Circulation. 2009;120(11):(suppl)  S177-S184
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fichtner S, Deisenhofer I, Kindsmüller S,  et al.  Prospective assessment of short- and long-term quality of life after ablation for atrial fibrillation.  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012;23(2):121-127
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wokhlu A, Monahan KH, Hodge DO,  et al.  Long-term quality of life after ablation of atrial fibrillation: the impact of recurrence, symptom relief, and placebo effect.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(21):2308-2316
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cooper HA, Bloomfield DA, Bush DE,  et al; AFFIRM Investigators.  Relation between achieved heart rate and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (from the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management [AFFIRM] Study).  Am J Cardiol. 2004;93(10):1247-1253
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Groenveld HF, Crijns HJ, Van den Berg MP,  et al; RACE II Investigators.  The effect of rate control on quality of life in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation: data from the RACE II (Rate Control Efficacy in Permanent Atrial Fibrillation II) study.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(17):1795-1803
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Levy T, Walker S, Mason M,  et al.  Importance of rate control or rate regulation for improving exercise capacity and quality of life in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and normal left ventricular function: a randomised controlled study.  Heart. 2001;85(2):171-178
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Paquette M, Roy D, Talajic M,  et al.  Role of gender and personality on quality-of-life impairment in intermittent atrial fibrillation.  Am J Cardiol. 2000;86(7):764-768
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jenkins LS, Brodsky M, Schron E,  et al.  Quality of life in atrial fibrillation: the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study.  Am Heart J. 2005;149(1):112-120
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Reynolds MR, Lavelle T, Essebag V, Cohen DJ, Zimetbaum P. Influence of age, sex, and atrial fibrillation recurrence on quality of life outcomes in a population of patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation: the Fibrillation Registry Assessing Costs, Therapies, Adverse Events and Lifestyle (FRACTAL) Study.  Am Heart J. 2006;152(6):1097-1103
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sears SF, Serber ER, Alvarez LG, Schwartzman DS, Hoyt RH, Ujhelyi MR. Understanding atrial symptom reports: objective versus subjective predictors.  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2005;28(8):801-807
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sarkar S, Ritscher D, Mehra R. A detector for a chronic implantable atrial tachyarrhythmia monitor.  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2008;55(3):1219-1224
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Supplemental Content

Verma A, Champagne J, Sapp J, et al. Asymptomatic episodes of atrial fibrillation before and after catheter ablation: a prospective, multicenter study. JAMA Intern Med. Published online December 24, 2012. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.1561.

eMethods.

eReference.

eFigure 1. Sample page of the diary used by patients for symptom reporting.

eFigure 2. Success rate after ablation as determined by symptoms with or without intermittent Holter monitoring vs implantable loop recorder (ILR).

eFigure 3. The percentage of asymptomatic atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia (AF/AFL/AT) by each participating site (red points connected by red line) and each site's procedural success rate (blue bars).

eTable. Number of patients receiving antiarrhythmics or anticoagulants before ablation and at specific times after ablation

Supplemental Content

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 28

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
JAMAevidence.com

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature
Clinical Resolution

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature
Clinical Scenario