Empirical Anatomy-Based Ablation vs Emphasize Map-Guided Substrate Ablation in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation : (COMPASS-AF)

Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) is increasingly being adopted in clinical practice due to its advantages in shortening procedure times and reducing the incidence of complications. While the majority of PFA-related research has focused on PVI-centric strategies, recent studies have reported that posterior wall isolation (PWI) using PFA can also be performed safely. However, sufficient clinical evidence regarding the efficacy of additional ablation strategies beyond PVI in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) has yet to be established.

The Emphasize mapping system, a software feature within the EnSite X platform, is designed to simultaneously visualize Voltage maps, Peak frequency, and CFAE-related information. Unlike the individual analysis of each parameter, this integrated approach allows for a more precise identification of electrophysiologically significant pathologic substrates by evaluating the complex characteristics of electrical signals holistically. Currently, however, Emphasize-guided ablation is technically limited to the use of radiofrequency (RF) energy.

Persistent AF is characterized by complex and heterogeneous mechanisms, meaning a single, uniform ablation strategy may not yield consistent clinical outcomes across all patients. Consequently, it is hypothesized that an individualized substrate ablation strategy guided by functional mapping may be more effective than a conventional, empirical anatomy-based approach.

Therefore, this study aims to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of an empirical anatomy-based ablation strategy using PFA versus an individualized Emphasize map-guided substrate ablation strategy in patients with persistent AF.