Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Complete LVA ablation shows no arrhythmia-free survival benefit in persistent AFComplete LVA Ablation Shows No Extra Benefit for AF

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider that complete LVA ablation did not improve arrhythmia-free survival versus no LVA ablation in persistent AF patients with LVA.

This post hoc subanalysis of a multicenter RCT evaluated the efficacy of complete low-voltage area (LVA) ablation in 341 patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) and left atrial LVA ≥5 cm² after pulmonary vein isolation. Patients were randomized to complete LVA ablation or no LVA ablation. The primary outcome was freedom from AF or atrial tachycardia recurrence.

After a follow-up duration not reported, there was no significant difference in arrhythmia-free survival between the complete LVA ablation group and the no LVA ablation group (HR 0.80; 95% CI 0.56-1.13). Propensity score matching yielded similar results (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.51-1.15). A trend toward greater benefit with increasing left atrial diameter was not significant (P=0.099).

Safety outcomes, including adverse events, serious adverse events, and discontinuations, were not reported. The study is limited by its post hoc design, making results exploratory. No funding or conflict of interest information was provided.

For clinical practice, leaving LVA ablation incomplete to avoid complications appears reasonable, as complete ablation did not demonstrate superiority. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution given the exploratory nature of the analysis.

How this fits prior evidence

This post hoc subanalysis adds to prior coverage on AF management. While SGLT2 inhibitors have shown robust prognostic benefits in heart failure with less certain effects on atrial arrhythmias, this study directly addresses ablation strategies. The neutral result contrasts with the expectation that more extensive ablation might improve outcomes, but aligns with the caution advised for incidental arrhythmia findings. The finding does not directly relate to the increased mortality risk with comorbid COPD and AF or the cognitive impairment risk associated with hypertension in AF patients.

A new analysis of a clinical trial looked at whether completely ablating low-voltage areas (LVA) in the left atrium improves outcomes for people with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). The study included 341 patients who had already undergone pulmonary vein isolation. Researchers compared those who received complete LVA ablation to those who had no LVA ablation.

The main finding: there was no significant difference in freedom from AF or atrial tachycardia recurrence between the two groups. This was true even after adjusting for patient differences using propensity score matching. The results suggest that adding complete LVA ablation does not provide extra benefit over pulmonary vein isolation alone.

Because this is a post hoc subanalysis, the findings are considered exploratory and not definitive. The study did not report on safety or side effects. The authors note that leaving LVA ablation incomplete to avoid complications appears reasonable.

For now, patients with persistent AF should discuss their treatment options with their doctor. This analysis does not change current practice, but it suggests that more ablation may not always be better.

What this means for you:
Complete LVA ablation did not improve AF outcomes compared to no LVA ablation in this analysis.

Common questions

What is low-voltage area (LVA) ablation?

Low-voltage area ablation is a procedure that targets areas of the heart with abnormal electrical signals. This study looked at whether completely ablating these areas improves outcomes for people with persistent atrial fibrillation.

Did complete LVA ablation help patients with AF?

No, the study found no significant difference in arrhythmia-free survival between patients who had complete LVA ablation and those who had no LVA ablation. The results were neutral.

Is this study reliable?

This is a post hoc subanalysis of a randomized trial, so the results are exploratory and not definitive. The findings should be confirmed in future studies.

Should I ask my doctor about LVA ablation?

Based on this analysis, complete LVA ablation did not show added benefit. Talk to your doctor about the best treatment for your specific condition, as this study does not change current recommendations.

Study Details

Study typeRct
Sample sizen = 341
EvidenceLevel 2
PublishedJun 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: Incomplete low-voltage area (LVA) ablation may confound evaluation of its true efficacy in persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). This post hoc subanalysis of the multicenter randomized SUPPRESS-AF trial assessed the impact of complete LVA ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with persistent AF and a left atrial (LA) LVA ≥5 cmafter pulmonary vein isolation were randomized to LVA ablation or no additional ablation. The primary endpoint was freedom from AF or atrial tachycardia recurrence, assessed by 24-h Holter and twice-daily electrocardiogram recordings. Outcomes were compared among 3 groups: no LVA ablation; complete LVA ablation; and incomplete LVA ablation. Among 341 patients, 170 underwent LVA ablation, including 37 with incomplete. LVA size was significantly larger in the incomplete than complete ablation group (22.0 vs. 12.2 cm; P<0.001). Incomplete LVA ablation was not associated with increased arrhythmia recurrence. Arrhythmia-free survival did not differ significantly between the complete and no LVA ablation groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-1.13), including after propensity score matching (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.51-1.15). However, a trend towards greater benefit of complete LVA ablation was observed with increasing LA diameter (P=0.099). CONCLUSIONS: Leaving LVA ablation incomplete to avoid complications appears reasonable. Although complete LVA ablation showed no overall superiority, LA enlargement may represent a clinically relevant factor for patient stratification.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.