Bond R, Olshansky B and Kirchhof P. Recent advances in rhythm control for atrial fibrillation [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6(F1000 Faculty Rev):1796 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11061.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
1University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK 2University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA 3Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hospital of the University of Münster, Münster, Germany 4Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET), Münster, Germany 5Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK 6Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a difficult management problem. The restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm—rhythm control therapy—can markedly improve symptoms and haemodynamics for patients who have paroxysmal or persistent AF, but some patients fare well with rate control alone. Sinus rhythm can be achieved with anti-arrhythmic drugs or electrical cardioversion, but the maintenance of sinus rhythm without recurrence is more challenging. Catheter ablation of the AF triggers is more effective than anti-arrhythmic drugs at maintaining sinus rhythm. Whilst pulmonary vein isolation is an effective strategy, other ablation targets are being evaluated to improve sinus rhythm maintenance, especially in patients with chronic forms of AF. Previously extensive ablation strategies have been used for patients with persistent AF, but a recent trial has shown that pulmonary vein isolation without additional ablation lesions is associated with outcomes similar to those of more extensive ablation. This has led to an increase in catheter-based technology to achieve durable pulmonary vein isolation. Furthermore, a combination of anti-arrhythmic drugs and catheter ablation seems useful to improve the effectiveness of rhythm control therapy. Two large ongoing trials evaluate whether a modern rhythm control therapy can improve prognosis in patients with AF.
Corresponding author:
Paulus Kirchhof
Competing interests:
BO is the chair of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board for the REDUCE-IT trial sponsored by Amarin, a national coordinator for the GLORIA-AF trial sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim, and a speaker and consultant for On-X/Cryolife and Lundbeck. PK receives research support from the European Union, the British Heart Foundation, the Leducq Foundation, the Medical Research Council (UK), and the German Centre for Cardiovascular Research and from several drug and device companies active in atrial fibrillation and has received honoraria from several such companies. PK is listed as inventor on two patents held by the University of Birmingham (Atrial Fibrillation Therapy WO 2015140571 and Markers for Atrial Fibrillation WO 2016012783). RB declares that he has no competing interests
Grant information:
This work was partially supported by the European Union (grant agreement 633196 [Characterising Afib by Translating its Causes into Health Modifiers in the Elderly] to PK), the British Heart Foundation (FS/13/43/30324 to PK), and the Leducq Foundation to PK.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a difficult management problem. The restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm—rhythm control therapy—can markedly improve symptoms and haemodynamics for patients who have paroxysmal or persistent AF, but some patients fare well with rate control alone1–4. AF can be a cause for impaired exercise capacity3, dementia, hypotension, syncope, dyspnoea, and heart failure, among other problems1,5, and is a major risk factor for ischaemic stroke1–4. In addition, AF is associated with a higher risk of death in long-term follow-up2,4–6.
AF management involves reducing stroke risk and improving symptoms and functionality. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) can prevent the majority of ischaemic strokes from AF in at-risk patients2,7. Controlling the ventricular rate during AF can improve patients’ symptoms, but the maintenance of sinus rhythm is necessary for complete improvement in some patients. Techniques to restore sinus rhythm include pharmacological cardioversion with anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs) and electrical cardioversion (performed with external defibrillation pads or an internal cardioversion catheter)8. Catheter and surgical ablation can prevent AF recurrence2,9. This review will discuss the current and recent advances in catheter ablation for rhythm control of AF.
Classification of atrial fibrillation
AF is classified as first detected episode, paroxysmal (spontaneously terminates or cardioverted in less than 7 days), persistent (AF lasting for more than 7 days or requiring pharmacological or electrical cardioversion), longstanding persistent (continuous AF for over 1 year when it is decided to adopt a rhythm control strategy), or permanent (when AF is accepted and rhythm control is no longer pursued)2,10. These definitions are used to guide treatment options for patients and also inclusion criteria for clinical trials11,12.
AF is often a chronic progressive disease, and animal studies have shown that “AF begets AF”13,14. In many patients, AF progresses as per currently accepted definitions; however, studies using implantable devices have shown that in some patients AF remains paroxysmal rather than progressing and persistent AF may regress to paroxysmal15,16. Furthermore, data from continued atrial rhythm monitoring using implantable devices have shown that a patient’s clinical AF classification poorly reflects the temporal persistence and suggests that the AF burden does not differ between patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF17. This may have implications for ablation strategy and inclusion criteria in clinical trials.
Indications for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation
Catheter ablation can be useful in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal, persistent, and longstanding persistent AF that is refractory to or where there is an intolerance to AADs2,9. Catheter ablation is more effective than AADs in maintaining sinus rhythm18–22. Catheter ablation is also effective for restoring sinus rhythm in patients with AF and heart failure, improving left ventricular ejection fraction and quality of life23,24. There is no current indication for catheter ablation to prevent cardiovascular outcomes or desired withdrawal of anticoagulation2. Patients are anticoagulated for the procedure either with uninterrupted warfarin aiming for an international normalised ratio of 2–3 or with an interrupted novel OAC (NOAC). Recent published trials comparing uninterrupted warfarin with uninterrupted NOACs for catheter ablation have had similar safety profiles25,26, and another trial comparing uninterrupted apixaban with uninterrupted warfarin is ongoing27. Anticoagulation is continued for at least 8 weeks after the procedure. The decision to stop anticoagulation is based on the risk profile of the patients using general anticoagulation guidelines (for example, CHADS2-VASc2) rather than the presumed rhythm outcome2. However, ongoing trials are investigating stopping anticoagulation after a successful ablation28.
Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation
AF is often initiated by ectopic beats arising from the pulmonary veins (PVs), although non-PV triggers (such as the superior vena cava [SVC], posterior left atrial free wall, crista terminalis, coronary sinus, and ligament of Marshall) have been described by several studies29–34. Furthermore, other arrhythmia mechanisms, most notably micro-re-entry and other re-entrant patterns of atrial excitation, contribute to the initiation and maintenance of AF35. The first successful reports of catheter ablation of AF targeted the triggering ectopic beats originating from the PVs preventing AF29,30. However, ablation within the PVs was associated with PV stenosis. It was recognised additionally that AF could also be initiated and maintained by PV antral tissue36–38. This led to electrical isolation of the PVs from the left atrium (PV isolation [PVI]) by either segmental PV ablation or, more commonly, wide area circumferential ablation (WACA) isolating the right and left PVs in pairs some distance from the venous tissue guided by 3D electro-anatomical mapping (EAM)39,40. 3D EAM uses an electromagnetic or impedance-based catheter location method to create a 3D anatomic shell of the atria41. 3D EAM allows accurate visualisation of catheters within the anatomical shell without the use of fluoroscopy, which has led to a reduction in fluoroscopy time, procedure time, and radiation dose to the patient and operator42–45. There are three main mapping systems available: CARTO® (Biosense Webster, Diamond Bar, CA, USA), EnSite™ NavX™ (St. Jude Medical, Sylmar, CA, USA), and Rhythmia™ (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA).
PVI remains the cornerstone of the AF ablation technique and is most commonly performed by point-by-point radiofrequency ablation46,47. However, whilst acute PVI may appear to be present after lesion delivery, there may be PV connection that is not evident because of local oedema masking conduction rather than actual tissue necrosis during the ablation48. Furthermore, suboptimal contact force between catheter tip and atrial tissue during ablation is believed to reduce efficacy, although formal testing of this hypothesis is awaited. Contact force technology has been developed to allow instant feedback to the operator to allow adequate contact to deliver durable lesion without excessive force, which could lead to mechanical injury. Contact force technology has led to a significant reduction in AF recurrences and has reduced fluoroscopy and procedure times49. Point-by-point radiofrequency ablation is complex and technically demanding, requires extensive training, and is largely limited to specialist centres47,48. The most commonly used alternative to point-by-point radiofrequency ablation is the cryoballoon ablation catheter, which creates a circular lesion (producing necrosis by freezing) around each PV and is associated with similar outcomes in paroxysmal AF47,50. Cryoballoon ablation is a simpler technique that can be associated with shorter procedural times but increased fluoroscopy times47,51. Cryoballoon ablation is now commonly used to isolate the PVs. Other balloon-mounted technologies developed for AF ablation are the high-intensity focussed ultrasound (HIFU) balloon, radiofrequency “hot” balloon, and visually guided laser balloon (VGLB)48,52,53. Transvenous HIFU was demonstrated to be effective but was removed from the market owing to an unacceptable complication rate, including fatal atrial-oesophageal fistulas9, but there may be a role for epicardial HIFU in surgical AF ablations54. The radiofrequency “hot” balloon has shown promise but is still undergoing clinical trials. VGLB has been approved for use in Europe and permits direct visualisation of the target atrial tissue during ablation and is associated with good short-term outcomes48,55.
Techniques for atrial fibrillation ablation
Durable PVI is accepted as an effective treatment for paroxysmal AF with 60–80% maintenance of sinus rhythm at 1 year and approximately equal to 50% at 5 years after a single procedure47,50,56–58. Ablation of non-PV triggers (SVC, posterior left atrial free wall, crista terminalis, coronary sinus, and ligament of Marshall) is usually performed if there is recurrent AF despite isolated PVs. Non-PV triggers can be identified by using isoproterenol infusion, isoproterenol and adenosine infusion, or rapid atrial pacing31,32,59,60. Ablation of non-PV triggers that still induced AF, after PVI, improved ablation outcomes in normal hearts and those with reduced ejection fraction59,60.
Results in those patients presenting with non-paroxysmal AF have lower success rates: 36–60% maintenance of sinus rhythm at 1 year and 20–42% long term after a single procedure12,57,61–63. Of note, some patients presenting with persistent AF have good long-term outcomes after AF ablation whereas other patients who present with paroxysmal AF have frequent and early recurrences. The structural remodelling that takes place in non-paroxysmal AF creates a substrate that maintains the arrhythmia and is believed to underlie recurrences when isolation of the PVs was successful64. Previous ablation techniques have aimed to target this substrate (substrate modification) in addition to PVI by either ablating complex atrial signals, so-called complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAEs), or creating linear lesions in the left atrium—a roof line connecting the lesions around the left and right upper superior veins, a mitral isthmus line connecting the mitral valve annulus and left inferior PV, and an anterior line connecting either the anterior left upper PV or the right upper PV to the mitral valve annulus9,12. In longstanding persistent AF, a “stepwise” approach has been described65. This starts with PVI followed by isolation of other thoracic veins—superior vena cava and coronary sinus. This is followed by ablation of CFAEs and then lines including a cavotricuspid line, roof line, and mitral isthmus line. At each step, if there is cardioversion to sinus rhythm, then ablation is stopped. Ablation techniques for persistent AF have longer procedure times and are associated with left atrial macro re-entrant tachycardia in 25% of patients2.
Recently, the Substrate and Trigger Ablation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation Trial Part II (STAR AF 2 trial) compared three approaches to the ablation of persistent AF: PVI alone, PVI plus CFAEs, and PVI plus a roof and mitral isthmus line12. The results of this study were quite surprising and showed no difference in outcomes between the three ablation strategies, illustrating the effectiveness of PVI for sinus rhythm maintenance in patients with AF. After 18 months of follow-up, 59% of patients assigned to PVI alone were AF-free compared with 49% of patients assigned to PVI plus CFAE ablation and 46% of patients assigned to PVI plus a roof and mitral isthmus line. A meta-analysis was performed incorporating data from STAR AF 2 as well as nine other studies with 1,821 patients included66. In comparison with PVI alone, CFAE ablation and linear lesions offered no significant improvement in arrhythmia-free survival. This landmark trial has changed the way many perform ablations for persistent AF, supporting the use of PVI alone as a first-line therapy, which in the future could be performed by cryoballoon or VGLB67. In fact, in a recent survey, the majority of centres (67%) were performing PVI alone as a first procedure in persistent AF, and over half of centres surveyed responded that the STAR AF 2 results had changed their strategy for persistent AF ablation68. New ablation strategies for the ablation of persistent AF continue to be developed. A technique to target sources or “rotors” of AF using a multi-electrode basket catheter showed initial promise with at least 80% freedom from AF at a year69,70; however, these results have not been replicated71–74. Interestingly, the CONFIRM (Conventional Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation With or Without Focal Impulse and Rotor Modulation) study also demonstrated that 45% of AF sources were coincidentally ablated with conventional ablation for persistent AF (WACA and roof line), which may also explain why some patients do well after PVI whereas others may need more extensive ablation70. A non-invasive vest comprising 252 body surface electrodes has also been developed to identify rotors; this technique records atrial epicardial electrograms, and a non-contrast computed tomography (CT) scan is used to produce anatomy and electrode position75,76. Another strategy recently described is scar homogenisation, where low-voltage areas in the atria thought to represent fibrosis are ablated77,78. These ablation strategies are still under development and have not been compared with PVI alone in randomised controlled multicentre trials. At present, PVI as first-line therapy for persistent AF is recommended2.
Complications of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation
A total of 5 to 7% of patients will suffer a complication after catheter ablation of AF2,79. The most frequent complications are related to vascular access and usually can be managed conservatively80. The most important severe complications are stroke/transient ischaemic attack (<1%), cardiac tamponade (1%), and phrenic nerve injury (0.001–3% depending on ablation energy used). PV stenosis, atrio-oesophageal fistula, and death are all rare2,12,47,79,81. Vascular access complications potentially can be reduced by using ultrasound to image the femoral veins80. Atrio-oesophageal fistulas are difficult to diagnose. Patients present with infection without a clear focus, pleuritic chest pain, stroke, or convulsions82. Transoesophageal echo should be avoided, and diagnosis is by CT scan with emergent cardiac surgery as the treatment of choice, although temporary stenting of the oesophagus has been used in early diagnoses83,84.
Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation
The Cox maze procedure for the surgical treatment of AF was first used in 1987 and involves the creation of atrial incisions (around the PVs and posterior left atrium, connecting to the mitral annulus, cavotricuspid isthmus, and cavocaval connection, and exclusion of the left atrial appendage), which prevents atrial re-entry and allows the sinus impulse to activate the entire atrial myocardium85. The long-term outcomes of 198 patients who underwent surgery, either as a standalone treatment for AF or in conjunction with other cardiac surgery, are excellent86, although the rhythm follow-up has been less rigorous than in controlled clinical trials. Despite its efficacy, the original Cox maze procedure is complex and technically difficult and is associated with a high incidence of major complications (12%), including three perioperative deaths and three perioperative strokes9,86. This has led to less-invasive techniques and hybrid procedures. Atrial incisions have been replaced with linear lines of ablation with radiofrequency energy, cryoablation, or HIFU and can be performed via mini-thoractomy2,9. In one trial, the results of minimally invasive surgical ablation were better than catheter ablation but with a significant increase in complications87. In an attempt to improve outcomes further, a “hybrid” approach, which combines a thorascopic epicardial with percutaneous endocardial catheter ablation, has recently been described88,89. Initial results have been excellent, but more trials are needed and the complication rates from surgery may make the procedure prohibitive for standalone AF but may be useful in those undergoing other cardiac surgery.
Hybrid rhythm control therapy
AADs are continued after a catheter ablation for 8–12 weeks during the so-called “blanking period”90. This strategy is used to reduce the early recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias whilst scar formation from ablation lesions takes place2,91. Evidence supporting this strategy is provided by the AMIO-CAT (amiodarone after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation) study, which randomly assigned patients to either short-term amiodarone or placebo and demonstrated a significant reduction in early recurrence of AF during the blanking period in the amiodarone group91. After the blanking period, it is common practice to stop AADs. However, catheter ablation with continued use of an AAD is associated with fewer recurrences of atrial tachyarrhythmias, and this includes AADs previously reported as ineffective90,92. Therefore, it would seem reasonable to continue on AADs after an ablation or to restart AADs if there is a single recurrence of AF, although in reality most patients would like to stop their AADs.
Future directions
Pursuing sinus rhythm in patients with AF is recommended for those who are symptomatic, although we still do not know whether it confers any prognostic benefit (that is, reducing stroke risk and mortality). Ongoing trials have been designed to answer this. EAST-AFNET 4 (Early treatment of Atrial fibrillation for Stroke prevention Trial) has enrolled over 2,500 patients and will test whether an early, comprehensive, rhythm control using either AADs or catheter ablation prevents adverse cardiovascular outcomes compared with usual care93. CABANA (Catheter Ablation versus Anti-arrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation Trial) will test the hypothesis that catheter ablation of AF is better than rate control or rhythm control with AADs at decreasing the incidence of mortality, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest94.
We also do not know what the best strategy for catheter ablation of persistent AF is. For now, it is recommended that PVI alone be performed for the first ablation procedure for persistent AF. However, further trials are needed, including trials comparing PVI alone with novel ablation techniques using multi-electrode basket catheters or vests to map rotors.
Competing interests
BO is the chair of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board for the REDUCE-IT trial sponsored by Amarin, a national coordinator for the GLORIA-AF trial sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim, and a speaker and consultant for On-X/Cryolife and Lundbeck. PK receives research support from the European Union, the British Heart Foundation, the Leducq Foundation, the Medical Research Council (UK), and the German Centre for Cardiovascular Research and from several drug and device companies active in atrial fibrillation and has received honoraria from several such companies. PK is listed as inventor on two patents held by the University of Birmingham (Atrial Fibrillation Therapy WO 2015140571 and Markers for Atrial Fibrillation WO 2016012783). RB declares that he has no competing interests
Grant information
This work was partially supported by the European Union (grant agreement 633196 [Characterising Afib by Translating its Causes into Health Modifiers in the Elderly] to PK), the British Heart Foundation (FS/13/43/30324 to PK), and the Leducq Foundation to PK.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
F1000 recommended
References
1.
Miyasaka Y, Barnes ME, Gersh BJ, et al.:
Secular trends in incidence of atrial fibrillation in Olmsted County, Minnesota, 1980 to 2000, and implications on the projections for future prevalence.
Circulation.
2006; 114(2): 119–25. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
2.
Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D, et al.:
2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS.
Europace.
2016; 18(11): 1609–78. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
3.
Go AS, Hylek EM, Phillips KA, et al.:
Prevalence of diagnosed atrial fibrillation in adults: national implications for rhythm management and stroke prevention: the AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) Study.
JAMA.
2001; 285(18): 2370–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
4.
Wolf PA, Benjamin EJ, Belanger AJ, et al.:
Secular trends in the prevalence of atrial fibrillation: The Framingham Study.
Am Heart J.
1996; 131(4): 790–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
5.
Benjamin EJ, Chen PS, Bild DE, et al.:
Prevention of atrial fibrillation: report from a national heart, lung, and blood institute workshop.
Circulation.
2009; 119(4): 606–18. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
6.
Benjamin EJ, Wolf PA, D'Agostino RB, et al.:
Impact of atrial fibrillation on the risk of death: the Framingham Heart Study.
Circulation.
1998; 98(10): 946–52. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
7.
Hart RG, Pearce LA, Aguilar MI:
Meta-analysis: antithrombotic therapy to prevent stroke in patients who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.
Ann Intern Med.
2007; 146(12): 857–67. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
8.
Boriani G, Biffi M, Camanini C, et al.:
Transvenous internal cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: a randomized comparison between catheters with different coil length.
Am Heart J.
2002; 144(5): 851–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
9.
Calkins H, Kuck KH, Cappato R, et al.:
2012 HRS/EHRA/ECAS expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: recommendations for patient selection, procedural techniques, patient management and follow-up, definitions, endpoints, and research trial design.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol.
2012; 33(2): 171–257. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
10.
January CT, Wann LS, Alpert JS, et al.:
2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society.
Circulation.
2014; 130(23): 2071–104. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
11.
Cosedis Nielsen J, Johannessen A, Raatikainen P, et al.:
Radiofrequency ablation as initial therapy in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
N Engl J Med.
2012; 367(17): 1587–95. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
12.
Verma A, Jiang CY, Betts TR, et al.:
Approaches to catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation.
N Engl J Med.
2015; 372(12): 1812–22. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
13.
Wijffels MC, Kirchhof CJ, Dorland R, et al.:
Atrial fibrillation begets atrial fibrillation. A study in awake chronically instrumented goats.
Circulation.
1995; 92(7): 1954–68. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
14.
Lu Z, Scherlag BJ, Lin J, et al.:
Atrial fibrillation begets atrial fibrillation: autonomic mechanism for atrial electrical remodeling induced by short-term rapid atrial pacing.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2008; 1(3): 184–92. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
15.
Veasey RA, Sugihara C, Sandhu K, et al.:
The natural history of atrial fibrillation in patients with permanent pacemakers: is atrial fibrillation a progressive disease?
J Interv Card Electrophysiol.
2015; 44(1): 23–30. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
16.
Jahangir A, Lee V, Friedman PA, et al.:
Long-term progression and outcomes with aging in patients with lone atrial fibrillation: a 30-year follow-up study.
Circulation.
2007; 115(24): 3050–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
17.
Charitos EI, Pürerfellner H, Glotzer TV, et al.:
Clinical classifications of atrial fibrillation poorly reflect its temporal persistence: insights from 1,195 patients continuously monitored with implantable devices.
J Am Coll Cardiol.
2014; 63(25 Pt A): 2840–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
18.
Scherr D, Khairy P, Miyazaki S, et al.:
Five-year outcome of catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation using termination of atrial fibrillation as a procedural endpoint.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2015; 8(1): 18–24. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
19.
Mont L, Bisbal F, Hernández-Madrid A, et al.:
Catheter ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drug treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation: a multicentre, randomized, controlled trial (SARA study).
Eur Heart J.
2014; 35(8): 501–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
20.
Schreiber D, Rostock T, Fröhlich M, et al.:
Five-year follow-up after catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation using the stepwise approach and prognostic factors for success.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2015; 8(2): 308–17. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
21.
Jaïs P, Cauchemez B, Macle L, et al.:
Catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drugs for atrial fibrillation: the A4 study.
Circulation.
2008; 118(24): 2498–505. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
22.
Pappone C, Augello G, Sala S, et al.:
A randomized trial of circumferential pulmonary vein ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the APAF Study.
J Am Coll Cardiol.
2006; 48(11): 2340–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
23.
Hunter RJ, Berriman TJ, Diab I, et al.:
A randomized controlled trial of catheter ablation versus medical treatment of atrial fibrillation in heart failure (the CAMTAF trial).
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2014; 7(1): 31–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
24.
Jones DG, Haldar SK, Hussain W, et al.:
A randomized trial to assess catheter ablation versus rate control in the management of persistent atrial fibrillation in heart failure.
J Am Coll Cardiol.
2013; 61(18): 1894–903. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
25.
Calkins H, Willems S, Gerstenfeld EP, et al.:
Uninterrupted Dabigatran versus Warfarin for Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation.
N Engl J Med.
2017; 376(17): 1627–36. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
26.
Cappato R, Marchlinski FE, Hohnloser SH, et al.:
Uninterrupted rivaroxaban vs. uninterrupted vitamin K antagonists for catheter ablation in non-valvular atrial fibrillation.
Eur Heart J.
2015; 36(28): 1805–11. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
27.
Di Biase L, Callans D, Hæusler KG, et al.:
Rationale and design of AXAFA-AFNET 5: an investigator-initiated, randomized, open, blinded outcome assessment, multi-centre trial to comparing continuous apixaban to vitamin K antagonists in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation catheter ablation.
Europace.
2017; 19(1): 132–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
28.
ClinicalTrials.gov: Optimal Anticoagulation for Higher Risk Patients Post-Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation Trial (OCEAN). (21 April 2017). Reference Source
29.
Haïssaguerre M, Jaïs P, Shah DC, et al.:
Spontaneous initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats originating in the pulmonary veins.
N Engl J Med.
1998; 339(10): 659–66. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
30.
Chen SA, Hsieh MH, Tai CT, et al.:
Initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats originating from the pulmonary veins: electrophysiological characteristics, pharmacological responses, and effects of radiofrequency ablation.
Circulation.
1999; 100(18): 1879–86. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
31.
Lin WS, Tai CT, Hsieh MH, et al.:
Catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation initiated by non-pulmonary vein ectopy.
Circulation.
2003; 107(25): 3176–83. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
32.
Tsai CF, Tai CT, Hsieh MH, et al.:
Initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats originating from the superior vena cava: electrophysiological characteristics and results of radiofrequency ablation.
Circulation.
2000; 102(1): 67–74. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
33.
Pastor A, Núñez A, Magalhaes A, et al.:
[The superior vena cava as a site of ectopic foci in atrial fibrillation].
Rev Esp Cardiol.
2007; 60(1): 68–71. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
34.
Hwang C, Wu TJ, Doshi RN, et al.:
Vein of marshall cannulation for the analysis of electrical activity in patients with focal atrial fibrillation.
Circulation.
2000; 101(13): 1503–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
35.
Schotten U, Verheule S, Kirchhof P, et al.:
Pathophysiological mechanisms of atrial fibrillation: a translational appraisal.
Physiol Rev.
2011; 91(1): 265–325. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
36.
Robbins IM, Colvin EV, Doyle TP, et al.:
Pulmonary vein stenosis after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation.
Circulation.
1998; 98(17): 1769–75. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
37.
Marrouche NF, Martin DO, Wazni O, et al.:
Phased-array intracardiac echocardiography monitoring during pulmonary vein isolation in patients with atrial fibrillation: impact on outcome and complications.
Circulation.
2003; 107(21): 2710–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
39.
Oral H, Scharf C, Chugh A, et al.:
Catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: segmental pulmonary vein ostial ablation versus left atrial ablation.
Circulation.
2003; 108(19): 2355–60. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
40.
Pappone C, Rosanio S, Oreto G, et al.:
Circumferential radiofrequency ablation of pulmonary vein ostia: A new anatomic approach for curing atrial fibrillation.
Circulation.
2000; 102(21): 2619–28. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
41.
Del Carpio Munoz F, Buescher TL, Asirvatham SJ:
Three-dimensional mapping of cardiac arrhythmias: what do the colors really mean?
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2010; 3(6): e6–11. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
42.
Estner HL, Deisenhofer I, Luik A, et al.:
Electrical isolation of pulmonary veins in patients with atrial fibrillation: reduction of fluoroscopy exposure and procedure duration by the use of a non-fluoroscopic navigation system (NavX).
Europace.
2006; 8(8): 583–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
43.
Stabile G, Scaglione M, del Greco M, et al.:
Reduced fluoroscopy exposure during ablation of atrial fibrillation using a novel electroanatomical navigation system: a multicentre experience.
Europace.
2012; 14(1): 60–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
44.
Bhakta D, Miller JM:
Principles of electroanatomic mapping.
Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J.
2008; 8(1): 32–50. PubMed Abstract
| Free Full Text
45.
Knackstedt C, Schauerte P, Kirchhof P:
Electro-anatomic mapping systems in arrhythmias.
Europace.
2008; 10 Suppl 3: iii28–34. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
47.
Kuck K, Brugada J, Fürnkranz A, et al.:
Cryoballoon or Radiofrequency Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.
N Engl J Med.
2016; 374(23): 2235–45. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
48.
Bhardwaj R, Reddy VY:
Visually-guided Laser Balloon Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: A "Real World" Experience.
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed).
2016; 69(5): 474–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
50.
Luik A, Radzewitz A, Kieser M, et al.:
Cryoballoon Versus Open Irrigated Radiofrequency Ablation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: The Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Noninferiority FreezeAF Study.
Circulation.
2015; 132(14): 1311–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
51.
Hunter RJ, Baker V, Finlay MC, et al.:
Point-by-Point Radiofrequency Ablation Versus the Cryoballoon or a Novel Combined Approach: A Randomized Trial Comparing 3 Methods of Pulmonary Vein Isolation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (The Cryo Versus RF Trial).
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
2015; 26(12): 1307–14. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
52.
Andrikopoulos G, Tzeis S, Vardas PE:
Invasive therapy for atrial fibrillation: recent developments in ablation, navigation and mapping technology.
Heart.
2011; 97(3): 237–43. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
53.
Yamaguchi Y, Sohara H, Takeda H, et al.:
Long-Term Results of Radiofrequency Hot Balloon Ablation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Safety and Rhythm Outcomes.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
2015; 26(12): 1298–306. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
54.
Singh S, Nair KK, Koruth JS, et al.:
The role of high-intensity focused ultrasound in ablation of atrial fibrillation and other cardiac arrhythmias.
RRFU.
2015; 3: 11–18. Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
55.
Dukkipati SR, Neuzil P, Skoda J, et al.:
Visual balloon-guided point-by-point ablation: reliable, reproducible, and persistent pulmonary vein isolation.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2010; 3(3): 266–73. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
56.
Ouyang F, Tilz R, Chun J, et al.:
Long-term results of catheter ablation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: lessons from a 5-year follow-up.
Circulation.
2010; 122(23): 2368–77. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
58.
Tzou WS, Marchlinski FE, Zado ES, et al.:
Long-term outcome after successful catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2010; 3(3): 237–42. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
59.
Elayi CS, Di Biase L, Bai R, et al.:
Administration of isoproterenol and adenosine to guide supplemental ablation after pulmonary vein antrum isolation.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
2013; 24(11): 1199–206. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
60.
Zhao Y, Di Biase L, Trivedi C, et al.:
Importance of non-pulmonary vein triggers ablation to achieve long-term freedom from paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients with low ejection fraction.
Heart Rhythm.
2016; 13(1): 141–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
61.
Tilz RR, Rillig A, Thum AM, et al.:
Catheter ablation of long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: 5-year outcomes of the Hamburg Sequential Ablation Strategy.
J Am Coll Cardiol.
2012; 60(19): 1921–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
62.
Chao TF, Tsao HM, Lin YJ, et al.:
Clinical outcome of catheter ablation in patients with nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation: results of 3-year follow-up.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2012; 5(3): 514–20. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
63.
Rostock T, Salukhe TV, Steven D, et al.:
Long-term single- and multiple-procedure outcome and predictors of success after catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation.
Heart Rhythm.
2011; 8(9): 1391–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
64.
Iwasaki YK, Nishida K, Kato T, et al.:
Atrial fibrillation pathophysiology: implications for management.
Circulation.
2011; 124(20): 2264–74. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
65.
Haïssaguerre M, Hocini M, Sanders P, et al.:
Catheter ablation of long-lasting persistent atrial fibrillation: clinical outcome and mechanisms of subsequent arrhythmias.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
2005; 16(11): 1138–47. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
66.
Scott PA, Silberbauer J, Murgatroyd FD:
The impact of adjunctive complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation and linear lesions on outcomes in persistent atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis.
Europace.
2016; 18(3): 359–67. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
68.
Dagres N, Bongiorni MG, Larsen TB, et al.:
Current ablation techniques for persistent atrial fibrillation: results of the European Heart Rhythm Association Survey.
Europace.
2015; 17(10): 1596–600. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
69.
Narayan SM, Krummen DE, Shivkumar K, et al.:
Treatment of atrial fibrillation by the ablation of localized sources: CONFIRM (Conventional Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation With or Without Focal Impulse and Rotor Modulation) trial.
J Am Coll Cardiol.
2012; 60(7): 628–36. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
70.
Narayan SM, Krummen DE, Clopton P, et al.:
Direct or coincidental elimination of stable rotors or focal sources may explain successful atrial fibrillation ablation: on-treatment analysis of the CONFIRM trial (Conventional ablation for AF with or without focal impulse and rotor modulation).
J Am Coll Cardiol.
2013; 62(2): 138–47. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
71.
Buch E, Share M, Tung R, et al.:
Long-term clinical outcomes of focal impulse and rotor modulation for treatment of atrial fibrillation: A multicenter experience.
Heart Rhythm.
2016; 13(3): 636–41. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
72.
Steinberg JS, Shah Y, Bhatt A, et al.:
Focal impulse and rotor modulation: Acute procedural observations and extended clinical follow-up.
Heart Rhythm.
2017; 14(2): 192–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
73.
Gianni C, Mohanty S, Di Biase L, et al.:
Acute and early outcomes of focal impulse and rotor modulation (FIRM)-guided rotors-only ablation in patients with nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation.
Heart Rhythm.
2016; 13(4): 830–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
74.
Benharash P, Buch E, Frank P, et al.:
Quantitative analysis of localized sources identified by focal impulse and rotor modulation mapping in atrial fibrillation.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2015; 8(3): 554–61. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
75.
Ramanathan C, Ghanem RN, Jia P, et al.:
Noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging for cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmia.
Nat Med.
2004; 10(4): 422–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
76.
Haissaguerre M, Hocini M, Shah AJ, et al.:
Noninvasive panoramic mapping of human atrial fibrillation mechanisms: a feasibility report.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
2013; 24(6): 711–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
77.
Kottkamp H, Berg J, Bender R, et al.:
Box Isolation of Fibrotic Areas (BIFA): A Patient-Tailored Substrate Modification Approach for Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
2016; 27(1): 22–30. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
78.
Rolf S, Kircher S, Arya A, et al.:
Tailored atrial substrate modification based on low-voltage areas in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2014; 7(5): 825–33. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
79.
Deshmukh A, Patel NJ, Pant S, et al.:
In-hospital complications associated with catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in the United States between 2000 and 2010: analysis of 93 801 procedures.
Circulation.
2013; 128(19): 2104–12. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
80.
Wynn GJ, Haq I, Hung J, et al.:
Improving safety in catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a prospective study of the use of ultrasound to guide vascular access.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
2014; 25(7): 680–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
81.
Gupta A, Perera T, Ganesan A, et al.:
Complications of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2013; 6(6): 1082–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
82.
Pappone C, Oral H, Santinelli V, et al.:
Atrio-esophageal fistula as a complication of percutaneous transcatheter ablation of atrial fibrillation.
Circulation.
2004; 109(22): 2724–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
83.
Bunch TJ, Nelson J, Foley T, et al.:
Temporary esophageal stenting allows healing of esophageal perforations following atrial fibrillation ablation procedures.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
2006; 17(4): 435–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
84.
Pappone C, Vicedomini G, Santinelli V:
Atrio-Esophageal Fistula After AF Ablation: Pathophysiology, Prevention &Treatment.
J Atr Fibrillation.
2013; 6(3): 860. PubMed Abstract
| Free Full Text
85.
Cox JL, Schuessler RB, D'Agostino HJ Jr, et al.:
The surgical treatment of atrial fibrillation. III. Development of a definitive surgical procedure.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.
1991; 101(4): 569–83. PubMed Abstract
86.
Prasad SM, Maniar HS, Camillo CJ, et al.:
The Cox maze III procedure for atrial fibrillation: long-term efficacy in patients undergoing lone versus concomitant procedures.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.
2003; 126(6): 1822–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
87.
Boersma LV, Castella M, van Boven W, et al.:
Atrial fibrillation catheter ablation versus surgical ablation treatment (FAST): a 2-center randomized clinical trial.
Circulation.
2012; 125(1): 23–30. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
88.
La Meir M, Gelsomino S, Lucà F, et al.:
Minimally invasive surgical treatment of lone atrial fibrillation: early results of hybrid versus standard minimally invasive approach employing radiofrequency sources.
Int J Cardiol.
2013; 167(4): 1469–75. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
89.
Krul SP, Driessen AH, van Boven WJ, et al.:
Thoracoscopic video-assisted pulmonary vein antrum isolation, ganglionated plexus ablation, and periprocedural confirmation of ablation lesions: first results of a hybrid surgical-electrophysiological approach for atrial fibrillation.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2011; 4(3): 262–70. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
90.
Arbelo E, Brugada J, Hindricks G, et al.:
The atrial fibrillation ablation pilot study: a European Survey on Methodology and results of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation conducted by the European Heart Rhythm Association.
Eur Heart J.
2014; 35(22): 1466–78. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
91.
Darkner S, Chen X, Hansen J, et al.:
Recurrence of arrhythmia following short-term oral AMIOdarone after CATheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (AMIO-CAT trial).
Eur Heart J.
2014; 35(47): 3356–64. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
92.
Calkins H, Reynolds MR, Spector P, et al.:
Treatment of atrial fibrillation with antiarrhythmic drugs or radiofrequency ablation: two systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
2009; 2(4): 349–61. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
93.
Kirchhof P, Breithardt G, Camm AJ, et al.:
Improving outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: rationale and design of the Early treatment of Atrial fibrillation for Stroke prevention Trial.
Am Heart J.
2013; 166(3): 442–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
94.
ClinicalTrials.gov: Catheter Ablation vs Anti-arrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation Trial (CABANA). (5 May 2016). Reference Source
1
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK 2
University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA 3
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hospital of the University of Münster, Münster, Germany 4
Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET), Münster, Germany 5
Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK 6
Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK
BO is the chair of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board for the REDUCE-IT trial sponsored by Amarin, a national coordinator for the GLORIA-AF trial sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim, and a speaker and consultant for On-X/Cryolife and Lundbeck. PK receives research support from the European Union, the British Heart Foundation, the Leducq Foundation, the Medical Research Council (UK), and the German Centre for Cardiovascular Research and from several drug and device companies active in atrial fibrillation and has received honoraria from several such companies. PK is listed as inventor on two patents held by the University of Birmingham (Atrial Fibrillation Therapy WO 2015140571 and Markers for Atrial Fibrillation WO 2016012783). RB declares that he has no competing interests
This work was partially supported by the European Union (grant agreement 633196 [Characterising Afib by Translating its Causes into Health Modifiers in the Elderly] to PK), the British Heart Foundation (FS/13/43/30324 to PK), and the Leducq Foundation to PK.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Bond R, Olshansky B and Kirchhof P. Recent advances in rhythm control for atrial fibrillation [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6(F1000 Faculty Rev):1796 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11061.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.
Share
Open Peer Review
Current Reviewer Status:
?
Key to Reviewer Statuses
VIEWHIDE
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations
A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation.
Reviewer Report03 Oct 2017
Shih-Ann Chen,
Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; Institute of Clinical Medicine and Cardiovascular Research Center, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
... Continue reading
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Faculty Reviews are commissioned and written by members of the prestigious Faculty Opinions Faculty, and are edited as a service to our readers. In order to make these reviews as comprehensive and accessible as possible, we seek the reviewers’ input before publication. The reviewers’ names and any additional comments they may have are published alongside the review, as is usual on F1000Research.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
... Continue reading
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Faculty Reviews are commissioned and written by members of the prestigious Faculty Opinions Faculty, and are edited as a service to our readers. In order to make these reviews as comprehensive and accessible as possible, we seek the reviewers’ input before publication. The reviewers’ names and any additional comments they may have are published alongside the review, as is usual on F1000Research.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations -
A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Adjust parameters to alter display
View on desktop for interactive features
Includes Interactive Elements
View on desktop for interactive features
Competing Interests Policy
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests'
Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper.
You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors.
You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student).
You work at the same institute as any of the authors.
You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission.
You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published.
Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests'
You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements.
You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors.
You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on.
Stay Updated
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Comments on this article Comments (0)