Skip to main content
The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery logoLink to The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
. 2014 Dec 5;47(6):499–503. doi: 10.5090/kjtcs.2014.47.6.499

Modern Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation

Kyung-Hwan Kim 1,
PMCID: PMC4279842  PMID: 25551069

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common type of arrhythmia and has a large global burden. In general, treatment of AF is based on medication and consists of rate and rhythm control together with anticoagulation. However, surgical treatment may be required in patients with AF combined with organic valvular heart diseases or who experience recurrence despite medication. In addition, surgical treatment plays a role in the treatment of lone AF. This article reviews the various surgical treatment options for AF.

Keywords: Atrial fibrillation, Catheter ablation, Arrhythmia surgery

INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common type of arrhythmia. In 2010, its global burden, which is progressively increasing, was more than 45 million cases [1].

Although multiple theories about the etiology of AF have been previously proposed, the exact pathophysiological mechanism is unknown and is thought to be mostly multifactorial [2]. In addition, many experts have reported that in at least 10% of the cases, no underlying cause is ever found, a condition that is known as lone AF [3]. The most common surgical treatment for all types of AF is based on the well-known Cox-Maze procedure. Although this procedure is quite successful and has had good long-term results, it is not considered curative. Nevertheless, many cardiothoracic surgeons, employing a number of modifications with a common lesion set, use the Cox-Maze procedure. This paper reviews the current methods of surgical treatment for AF and offers some suggestions on how treatment methods can be further developed to facilitate better outcomes.

DEFINITION AND DIAGNOSIS

AF is defined as an abnormal heart rhythm with the following characteristics on an electrocardiogram: (1) absolutely irregular RR intervals; (2) no distinct P waves, and (3) atrial cycle length (when visible) usually variable within 200 milliseconds (>300 beats per minute) [4]. AF is confirmed diagnostically if the above characteristics last sufficiently long enough for a 12-lead echocardiogram to be recorded or for at least 30 seconds on a rhythm strip.

CLASSIFICATION

AF is classified based on presentation and duration. Many classifications have been adopted, but the most recent is that reported by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in 2010 as follows [4].

  1. Every patient who presents with AF for the first time is considered a patient with first diagnosed AF, irrespective of the duration of the arrhythmia or the presence and severity of AF-related symptoms.

  2. Paroxysmal AF is self-terminating, usually within 48 hours. Although AF paroxysms may continue for up to 7 days, the 48-hour time point is clinically important-after this the likelihood of spontaneous conversion is low and anticoagulation must be considered.

  3. Persistent AF is present when an AF episode either lasts longer than 7 days or requires termination by cardioversion, either with drugs or by direct current cardioversion.

  4. Long-standing persistent AF has lasted for ≥1 year when it is decided to adopt a rhythm control strategy.

  5. Permanent AF is said to exist when the presence of the arrhythmia is accepted by the patient (and physician). Hence, rhythm control interventions are, by definition, not pursued in patients with permanent AF. Should a rhythm control strategy be adopted, the arrhythmia is redesignated as ‘long-standing persistent AF.’

In addition to the above classification, the guidelines published by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), American Heart Association (AHA), and ESC describe additional AF categories in terms of other characteristics as stated below [5].

  1. Lone AF refers to AF in patients younger than 60 years of age without clinical or echocardiographic evidence of any sort of cardiopulmonary disease, including hypertension.

  2. Nonvalvular AF refers to AF that occurs in the absence of rheumatic mitral valve disease, a prosthetic heart valve, or valve repair.

  3. Secondary AF is a separate classification used in the context of acute myocardial infarctions, cardiac surgery, pericarditis, myocarditis, hyperthyroidism, or acute pulmonary disease. In these situations, AF is not the primary problem, and it is usually terminated with the concurrent treatment of the underlying disorder.

MEDICAL MANAGEMENT

Medical management differs according to whether the therapeutic goal is rhythm control or rate control. Rhythm control aims to restore and maintain sinus rhythm, whereas rate control allows AF to persist while attempting to control the ventricular rate response. The specific drugs used in the medical management of AF are listed in detail in the ACC/AHA/ESC guidelines [5]. In a review of these guidelines, the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management, Rate Control versus Electrical Cardioversion for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Study, Atrial Fibrillation and Congestive Heart Failure trials found the mortality of the rhythm control strategy and rate control strategy to be approximately the same. Therefore, a rate control strategy without attempts at restoring or maintaining sinus rhythm can reasonably be used in some patients with AF, especially those who are elderly and asymptomatic. For such patients, rhythm control may become the main goal if rate control offers inadequate symptomatic relief.

ROLE OF ANTICOAGULATION

Patients with AF have a risk for stroke approximately five times higher than those without AF, and AF is also known to cause an estimated 15% of all strokes [6,7]. Oral anticoagulation drugs may be used in combination with antiarrhythmic drugs to prevent stroke and other thromboembolic events. The vitamin K antagonist warfarin is by far the most commonly used oral anticoagulant mainly because warfarin can also be used universally for the management of implanted artificial valves in patients with AF who have received a valve replacement. However, warfarin is associated with a higher risk of bleeding and requires regular blood tests to monitor the international normalized ratio, which is usually controlled within a narrow target range. In patients not eligible for warfarin, antiplatelets such as aspirin alone or aspirin in combination with clopidogrel may be prescribed.

During recent years, new oral anticoagulants have been introduced as an alternative to prevent stroke in patients with lone or nonvalvular AF. The two main classes of new oral anticoagulants are direct factor IIa (thrombin) inhibitors and factor Xa inhibitors. In the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy study, the direct factor IIa (thrombin) inhibitor dabigatran etexilate was determined to prevent stroke at the same rate as warfarin, but with lower rates of major bleeding [8]. Rivaroxaban [9], apixaban [10], edoxaban [11], and betrixaban [12] are examples of oral factor Xa inhibitors under development for the prevention of stroke.

OTHER NON-SURGICAL TREATMENT MODALITIES REFRACTORY TO MEDICATION

Direct-current cardioversion is a procedure to electrically convert an arrhythmia to a normal sinus rhythm. Electrical cardioversion is most frequently used to treat AF with hemodynamic instability that persists despite medication. It also can be used to treat almost any type of arrhythmia, including atrial flutter and ventricular tachycardia.

Radiofrequency catheter ablation is a procedure performed percutaneously through one or both femoral veins as an option for symptomatic patients with AF refractory to antiarrhythmic drugs or where medication is contraindicated [13]. Although radiofrequency catheter ablation is known to be more effective than antiarrhythmic drugs [14], the rate of sinus rhythm restoration is low with a high rate of recurrence and reintervention [15].

While performing percutaneous transvenous catheter ablation, occlusion of the left atrial appendage (LAA) can be accomplished with devices such as the WATCHMAN [16], PLAATO [17], or the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug device [18]. However, these devices have been associated with procedural complications such as pericardial effusion, incomplete appendage closure, dislodgement of the device, thrombus formation on the device, and air embolism due to the catheter-based technique [19,20]. Despite the development of novel devices, internal occlusion of the LAA is very challenging due to its heterogeneous anatomy [21].

SURGICAL MANAGEMENT

The Cox-Maze III procedure is the gold standard for the surgical treatment of AF. This procedure is usually performed concomitantly during open-heart surgery in AF patients with other valvular or coronary diseases through a median sternotomy. Another surgical approach is to perform a right thoracotomy for concomitant mitral valve surgery along with the maze procedure [22].

The classical Cox-Maze III procedure, first introduced by Dr. James Cox in 1988, was performed in a cut-and-sew method using a biatrial lesion set [23]. This cut-and-sew procedure is rarely performed now since it requires extensive incisions over a prolonged period. This procedure was then modified using cryoablation to replace most of the cut-and-sew incisions of the lesion sets, resulting in the modified Cox-Maze III procedure [24]. Other than cryoablation, other various energy sources for the maze procedure have been reported, such as unipolar or bipolar radiofrequency, high intensity focused ultrasound, microwaves, and lasers. In 2002, the Cox-Maze IV procedure was developed to simplify the Cox-Maze III procedure by incorporating a combination of bipolar radiofrequency energy and cryoablation to further limit the incisions. The Cox-Maze IV lesion sets consist of bipolar radiofrequency ablation of the separate pulmonary artery box lesions and lines between both boxes superiorly and inferiorly, and cryoablation of only the tricuspid annular lesion and mitral isthmus lesion [25].

Cryoablation with argon or nitrous oxide is preferably used endocardially, while radiofrequency and high intensity focused ultrasound are used epicardially (radiofrequency can also be used endocardially) when performing the Cox-Maze III or IV procedure. Microwave energy can be applied either endocardially while performing other open-heart procedures or epicardially on the beating heart. However, transmurality cannot be guaranteed, and the results are variable with maintenance of sinus rhythm ranging from 42% to 81% one year after the procedure [26,27]. High intensity focused ultrasound is a relatively new and promising energy source that can feasibly create transmural lesions either endocardially or epicardially, but a recent study has reported a low success rate with a high complication rate [28].

Whichever energy source is used, the complete maze lesion set is not fully reproducible on the epicardial surface. To fully reproduce all maze lesions and further increase the success rate in minimally invasive approaches, a hybrid procedure of both surgical epicardial and percutaneous transvenous catheter ablation on the beating heart for lone AF has been introduced recently and can be performed simultaneously as a single-stage or two-stage procedure [29,30].

Surgical exclusion of the LAA is usually performed by internal obliteration when performing the maze procedure concomitantly with other open-heart surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass. The method of internal obliteration can be completed by simply oversewing the opening of the LAA or via a patch closure with a synthetic material. When performing minimally invasive surgical LAA exclusion on the beating heart, an external closure must be used. External closure is achieved by suturing, stapling, or ligating the base of the LAA.

CONCLUSION

Since its introduction by Dr. James Cox in 1988, the Cox-Maze procedure has been regarded as the gold standard for the surgical treatment of AF. Subsequently, modifications of the Cox-Maze procedure have been developed by incorporating various energy sources to minimize the surgical incisions of the lesion sets and using minimally invasive approaches to avoid median sternotomy. Currently, the Cox-Maze IV procedure based on the classical Cox-Maze III lesion set is preferred, and minimally invasive procedures are reserved for lone AF. Although thoracoscopic epicardial ablation on the beating heart has the advantage of being minimally invasive without cardiopulmonary bypass, it has been shown to have difficulty in reproducing all lesion sets of the classical Cox-Maze III procedure [31].

To overcome this limitation and improve outcomes, a hybrid procedure of both surgical epicardial and percutaneous transvenous catheter ablation can be performed simultaneously as a single-stage or two-stage procedure [29,30]. If the minimally invasive approach is enhanced by further development of special ablation probes, a simpler and safer surgical maze procedure could be developed. Percutaneous catheter ablation also shows increasing success rates due to improved mapping and sensing techniques, although device closure in the LAA have led to various complications. Although surgical management of AF has usually only been performed concomitantly with open-heart surgery in patients with other valvular or coronary diseases, its applications have continued to expand for lone AF. Therefore, sole surgical ablation along with the further technical development of surgical excision of the LAA may emerge as the standard treatment for AF. The further development of the maze operation, using a minimally invasive approach, will lead cardiac surgeons to promising future possibilities.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by a Grant of the Samsung Vein Clinic Network (Daejeon, Anyang, Cheongju, Cheonan) (Fund No.KTCS04-010).

Footnotes

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Chugh SS, Havmoeller R, Narayanan K, et al. Worldwide epidemiology of atrial fibrillation: a Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study. Circulation. 2014;129:837–47. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.005119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Soliman EZ, Alonso A, Goff DC., Jr Atrial fibrillation and ethnicity: the known, the unknown and the paradox. Future Cardiol. 2009;5:547–56. doi: 10.2217/fca.09.49. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Gershlick AH. Treating the non-electrical risks of atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 1997;18( Suppl C):C19–26. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/18.suppl_c.19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.European Heart Rhythm Association; European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. Camm AJ, et al. Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: the Task Force for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Eur Heart J. 2010;31:2369–429. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Fuster V, Ryden LE, Cannom DS, et al. 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:e257–354. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.177292. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Risk factors for stroke and efficacy of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation: analysis of pooled data from five randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:1449–57. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Wolf PA, Abbott RD, Kannel WB. Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham Study. Stroke. 1991;22:983–8. doi: 10.1161/01.str.22.8.983. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1139–51. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0905561. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:883–91. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1009638. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lopes RD, Alexander JH, Al-Khatib SM, et al. Apixaban for reduction in stroke and other ThromboemboLic events in atrial fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial: design and rationale. Am Heart J. 2010;159:331–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2009.07.035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Giugliano RP, Ruff CT, Braunwald E, et al. Edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:2093–104. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1310907. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Connolly SJ, Eikelboom J, Dorian P, et al. Betrixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: results of a phase 2, randomized, dose-ranging study (Explore-Xa) Eur Heart J. 2013;34:1498–505. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Lubitz SA, Fischer A, Fuster V. Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. BMJ. 2008;336:819–26. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39513.555150.BE. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Terasawa T, Balk EM, Chung M, et al. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:191–202. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-3-200908040-00131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Reynolds MR, Zimetbaum P, Josephson ME, Ellis E, Danilov T, Cohen DJ. Cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2009;2:362–9. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.108.837294. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Sick PB, Schuler G, Hauptmann KE, et al. Initial worldwide experience with the WATCHMAN left atrial appendage system for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:1490–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.02.035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Ostermayer SH, Reisman M, Kramer PH, et al. Percutaneous left atrial appendage transcatheter occlusion (PLAATO system) to prevent stroke in high-risk patients with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation: results from the international multi-center feasibility trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:9–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.03.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Rodes-Cabau J, Champagne J, Bernier M. Transcatheter closure of the left atrial appendage: initial experience with the Amplatzer cardiac plug device. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;76:186–92. doi: 10.1002/ccd.22499. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Fountain R, Holmes DR, Jr, Hodgson PK, Chandrasekaran K, Van Tassel R, Sick P. Potential applicability and utilization of left atrial appendage occlusion devices in patients with atrial fibrillation. Am Heart J. 2006;152:720–3. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2006.05.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Reddy VY, Holmes D, Doshi SK, Neuzil P, Kar S. Safety of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: results from the Watchman Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic Protection in Patients with AF (PROTECT AF) clinical trial and the Continued Access Registry. Circulation. 2011;123:417–24. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.976449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Di Biase L, Santangeli P, Anselmino M, et al. Does the left atrial appendage morphology correlate with the risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation?: results from a multicenter study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:531–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.04.032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Rodriguez E, Cook RC, Chu MW, Chitwood WR. Minimally invasive biatrial CryoMaze operation for atrial fibrillation. Op Tech Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;14:208–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.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;101:569–83. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ad N. The Cox-Maze procedure: history, results, and predictors for failure. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2007;20:65–71. doi: 10.1007/s10840-007-9176-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Gaynor SL, Diodato MD, Prasad SM, et al. A prospective, single-center clinical trial of a modified Cox maze procedure with bipolar radiofrequency ablation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004;128:535–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.02.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Pruitt JC, Lazzara RR, Ebra G. Minimally invasive surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: the thoracoscopic box lesion approach. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2007;20:83–7. doi: 10.1007/s10840-007-9172-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Wisser W, Khazen C, Deviatko E, et al. Microwave and radiofrequency ablation yield similar success rates for treatment of chronic atrial fibrillation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2004;25:1011–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.01.050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Klinkenberg TJ, Ahmed S, Ten Hagen A, et al. Feasibility and outcome of epicardial pulmonary vein isolation for lone atrial fibrillation using minimal invasive surgery and high intensity focused ultrasound. Europace. 2009;11:1624–31. doi: 10.1093/europace/eup299. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Pison L, La Meir M, van Opstal J, Blaauw Y, Maessen J, Crijns HJ. Hybrid thoracoscopic surgical and transvenous catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:54–61. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.12.055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Muneretto C, Bisleri G, Bontempi L, Curnis A. Durable staged hybrid ablation with thoracoscopic and percutaneous approach for treatment of long-standing atrial fibrillation: a 30-month assessment with continuous monitoring. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;144:1460–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.08.069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Lockwood D, Nakagawa H, Peyton MD, et al. Linear left atrial lesions in minimally invasive surgical ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation: techniques for assessing conduction block across surgical lesions. Heart Rhythm. 2009;6(12 Suppl):S50–63. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2009.09.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery are provided here courtesy of Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

RESOURCES