Personalizing an ablation for persistent AF
A multicenter randomized, controlled, double-blind superiority trial tested whether adding AI-detected spatio-temporal electrogram-dispersion targets to pulmonary-vein isolation improves treatment of drug-refractory persistent atrial fibrillation.
- Maturity
- Demonstrated, stage 3 of 4
- Support
- 1 source · paper
- Evidence detail
- How we know ↓
Persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation can remain difficult to treat with a standard anatomical ablation procedure.
Clinicians need reproducible ways to identify patient-specific electrical patterns that might guide additional ablation targets.
An AI algorithm detected areas of spatio-temporal electrogram dispersion for the tailored ablation arm, in addition to pulmonary-vein isolation.
What was shown, and what wasn’t
Shown
At 12 months after a single ablation, 88% of the tailored arm (n=187) versus 70% of the PVI-only arm (n=183) met the primary efficacy endpoint: freedom from documented atrial fibrillation with or without antiarrhythmic drugs (P<0.0001 for superiority).
Not shown · limits
- There was no significant between-arm difference in freedom from any atrial arrhythmia after one ablation.
- Procedure and ablation times were twice as long in the tailored arm.
- The results apply to the trial's selected persistent-AF population and procedure context.
Bright editorial interpretation
The study tests AI-guided targeting against a clinical comparator with a one-year patient outcome, rather than only a retrospective diagnostic metric.
Still open
Do benefits persist over longer follow-up and across broader patient populations?
How do procedure burden, complications, cost, and repeat procedures compare outside the trial?
How we know1 source · checked 2026-09-07 · no corrections
Original sources
Institutions: TAILORED-AF Investigators
- Maturity
- Demonstrated
- Source published
- 2025-02-14
- Captured
- 2026-09-07
- Last source review
- 2026-09-07
- Editorial method
- AI-assisted source review
Bright compared this account with the linked original and supporting sources and kept reported, budgeted, projected, and observed claims distinct. Bright did not independently audit the underlying records.
Maturity describes the tested or operational setting. Confidence describes support for the particular claim; one does not determine the other.
Revision & correction history
2026-09-07 · The study tests AI-guided targeting against a clinical comparator with a one-year patient outcome, rather than only a retrospective diagnostic metric.
No corrections recorded.