Browsing by Author "Reddy, Vivek Y."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Initial Independent Outcomes from Focal Impulse and Rotor Modulation Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: Multicenter FIRM Registry
    (Wiley, 2014-09) Miller, John M.; Kowal, Robert C.; Swarup, Vijay; Daubert, James P.; Daoud, Emile G.; Day, John D.; Ellenbogen, Kenneth A.; Hummel, John D.; Baykaner, Tina; Krummen, David E.; Narayan, Sanjiv M.; Reddy, Vivek Y.; Shivkumar, Kalyanam; Steinberg, Jonathan S.; Wheelan, Kevin R.; Department of Medicine, IU School of Medicine
    Introduction The success of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for atrial fibrillation (AF) may be improved if stable AF sources identified by Focal Impulse and Rotor Mapping (FIRM) are also eliminated. The long-term results of this approach are unclear outside the centers where FIRM was developed; thus, we assessed outcomes of FIRM-guided AF ablation in the first cases at 10 experienced centers. Methods We prospectively enrolled n = 78 consecutive patients (61 ± 10 years) undergoing FIRM guided ablation for persistent (n = 48), longstanding persistent (n = 7), or paroxysmal (n = 23) AF. AF recordings from both atria with a 64-pole basket catheter were analyzed using a novel mapping system (Rhythm View™; Topera Inc., CA, USA). Identified rotors/focal sources were ablated, followed by PVI. Results Each institution recruited a median of 6 patients, each of whom showed 2.3 ± 0.9 AF rotors/focal sources in diverse locations. 25.3% of all sources were right atrial (RA), and 50.0% of patients had ≥1 RA source. Ablation of all sources required a total of 16.6 ± 11.7 minutes, followed by PVI. On >1 year follow-up with a 3-month blanking period, 1 patient lost to follow-up (median time to 1st recurrence: 245 days, IQR 145–354), single-procedure freedom from AF was 87.5% (patients without prior ablation; 35/40) and 80.5% (all patients; 62/77) and similar for persistent and paroxysmal AF (P = 0.89). Conclusions Elimination of patient-specific AF rotors/focal sources produced freedom-from-AF of ≈80% at 1 year at centers new to FIRM. FIRM-guided ablation has a rapid learning curve, yielding similar results to original FIRM reports in each center’s first cases.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Randomized evaluation of redo ablation procedures of atrial fibrillation with focal impulse and rotor modulation-guided procedures: the REDO-FIRM study
    (Oxford University Press, 2023) Spitzer, Stefan G.; Miller, John M.; Sommer, Philipp; Szili-Torok, Tamas; Reddy, Vivek Y.; Nölker, Georg; Williams, Chris; Sarver, Anne; Wilber, David J.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Aims: REDO-FIRM evaluated safety and effectiveness of conventional vs. focal impulse and rotor modulation (FIRM)-guided ablation of recurrent persistent or paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) after an initial AF ablation procedure. Methods and results: This prospective, multicentre, randomized study included patients with a single prior AF ablation, but with recurrent AF and reconnected pulmonary veins (PVs). Conventional ablation generally included PV re-isolation; however, additional ablation was permitted per physician discretion. In the FIRM arm, beyond PV re-isolation, basket catheter-based FIRM mapping created dynamic animations of putative rotors, which were targeted for ablation. Between May 2016 and July 2019, 269 subjects were randomized, with 243 subjects completing 12-month follow-up. Ablation beyond re-pulmonary vein isolation, the FIRM vs. Conventional arms did not differ significantly: cavo-tricuspid isthmus -9.0% vs. 15.3%, caval vein isolation -1.5% vs. 0.8%, non-PV trigger -2.2% vs. 3.8%, other -11.9% vs. 13.0%. Single procedure 12-month freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia/atrial flutter-recurrence was 63.3% (76/120) vs. 59.0% (72/122) in the FIRM and Conventional arms (P = 0.3503). Efficacy was similar in the paroxysmal and persistent AF subgroups (P = 0.22 and P = 0.48). The 10-day and 12-month safety endpoints were achieved in 93.3% vs. 93.8% (P = 0.89) and 88.4% vs. 93.4% (P = 0.22) in the FIRM and Conventional arms, respectively. Conclusions: In REDO-FIRM, as compared to standard ablation, FIRM-guided ablation did not provide additional efficacy in redo ablation procedures, but FIRM-guided ablation was equally safe. Additional studies are necessary to identify any potential population able to benefit from FIRM-guided ablation.