-
JAMA May 2018Vasopressin is an alternative to catecholamine vasopressors for patients with distributive shock-a condition due to excessive vasodilation, most frequently from severe... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Association of Vasopressin Plus Catecholamine Vasopressors vs Catecholamines Alone With Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Distributive Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
IMPORTANCE
Vasopressin is an alternative to catecholamine vasopressors for patients with distributive shock-a condition due to excessive vasodilation, most frequently from severe infection. Blood pressure support with a noncatecholamine vasopressor may reduce stimulation of adrenergic receptors and decrease myocardial oxygen demand. Atrial fibrillation is common with catecholamines and is associated with adverse events, including mortality and increased length of stay (LOS).
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether treatment with vasopressin + catecholamine vasopressors compared with catecholamine vasopressors alone was associated with reductions in the risk of adverse events.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to February 2018. Experts were asked and meta-registries searched to identify ongoing trials.
STUDY SELECTION
Pairs of reviewers identified randomized clinical trials comparing vasopressin in combination with catecholamine vasopressors to catecholamines alone for patients with distributive shock.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers abstracted data independently. A random-effects model was used to combine data.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was atrial fibrillation. Other outcomes included mortality, requirement for renal replacement therapy (RRT), myocardial injury, ventricular arrhythmia, stroke, and LOS in the intensive care unit and hospital. Measures of association are reported as risk ratios (RRs) for clinical outcomes and mean differences for LOS.
RESULTS
Twenty-three randomized clinical trials were identified (3088 patients; mean age, 61.1 years [14.2]; women, 45.3%). High-quality evidence supported a lower risk of atrial fibrillation associated with vasopressin treatment (RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.88]; risk difference [RD], -0.06 [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.01]). For mortality, the overall RR estimate was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.82 to 0.97; RD, -0.04 [95% CI, -0.07 to 0.00]); however, when limited to trials at low risk of bias, the RR estimate was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.84 to 1.11). The overall RR estimate for RRT was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; RD, -0.07 [95% CI, -0.12 to -0.01]). However, in an analysis limited to trials at low risk of bias, RR was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.53 to 0.92, P for interaction = .77). There were no significant differences in the pooled risks for other outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the addition of vasopressin to catecholamine vasopressors compared with catecholamines alone was associated with a lower risk of atrial fibrillation. Findings for secondary outcomes varied.
Topics: Atrial Fibrillation; Catecholamines; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Length of Stay; Male; Publication Bias; Shock; Vasoconstrictor Agents; Vasopressins
PubMed: 29801010
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.4528 -
Journal of the American Heart... Jul 2017The original non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) trials in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) enrolled patients with native valve pathologies. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effects of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Valvular Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
The original non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) trials in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) enrolled patients with native valve pathologies. The object of this study was to quantify the benefit-risk profiles of NOACs versus warfarin in AF patients with native valvular heart disease (VHD).
METHODS AND RESULTS
Trials were identified by exhaustive literature search. Trial data were combined using inverse variance weighting to produce a meta-analytic summary hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of efficacy and safety of NOACs versus warfarin. Our final analysis included 4 randomized controlled trials that enrolled 71 526 participants, including 13 574 with VHD. Pooling results from included trials showed that NOACs versus warfarin reduced stroke or systemic embolism (HR: 0.70; 95% CI, 0.60-0.82) and intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24-0.92) in AF patients with VHD. However, risk reduction of major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage was driven by apixaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran (HR for major bleeding: 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69-0.91]; HR for intracranial hemorrhage: 0.33 [95% CI, 0.25-0.45]) but not rivaroxaban (HR for major bleeding: 1.56 [95% CI, 1.20-2.04]; HR for intracranial hemorrhage: 1.27 [95% CI, 0.77-2.10]).
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with AF and native VHD, NOACs reduce stroke and systemic embolism compared with warfarin. Evidence shows that apixaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban also reduce bleeding in this patient subgroup, whereas major bleeding (but not intracranial hemorrhage or mortality rate) is significantly increased in VHD patients treated with rivaroxaban. NOACs are a reasonable alternative to warfarin in AF patients with VHD.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Coagulation; Chi-Square Distribution; Female; Heart Valve Diseases; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Male; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Risk Factors; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin
PubMed: 28720644
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.117.005835 -
JAMA Cardiology Jun 2021Early rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF) with either antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) or catheter ablation has been reported to improve cardiovascular outcomes... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Early rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF) with either antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) or catheter ablation has been reported to improve cardiovascular outcomes compared with usual care; however, the optimal therapeutic modality to achieve early rhythm control is unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the safety and efficacy of AF ablation as first-line therapy when compared with AADs in patients with paroxysmal AF.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and various major scientific conference sessions from January 1, 2000, through November 23, 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published in English that had at least 12 months of follow-up and compared clinical outcomes of ablation vs AADs as first-line therapy in adults with AF. The quality of individual studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Six RCTs met inclusion criteria, including 1212 patients.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two investigators independently extracted data. Reporting was performed in compliance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis) guidelines. Analysis was performed using a random-effects model with the Mantel-Haenszel method, and results are presented as 95% CIs.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Main outcomes were safety and efficacy of AF ablation as first-line therapy when compared with AADs. Trials were evaluated as having low risk of selection and attrition biases, high risk of performance bias, and with unclear risk for detection biases due to unblinding and open-label designs.
RESULTS
A total of 6 RCTs involving 1212 patients with AF were included (609 were randomized to AF ablation and 603 to drug therapy; mean [SD] age, 56 [11] years). Compared with AADs, catheter ablation use was associated with reductions in recurrent atrial arrhythmia (32.3% vs 53%; risk ratio [RR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51-0.74; P < .001; I2 = 40%), with a number needed to treat with ablation to prevent 1 arrhythmia of 5. Use of ablation was also associated with reduced symptomatic atrial arrhythmia (11.8% vs 26.4%; RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27-0.72; P = .001; I2 = 54%) and hospitalization (5.6% vs 18.7%; RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.19-0.53; P < .001) with no significant difference in serious adverse events between the groups (4.2% vs 2.8%; RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.81-2.85; P = .19).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials including first-line therapy of patients with paroxysmal AF, catheter ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drugs was associated with reductions in recurrence of atrial arrhythmias and hospitalizations, with no difference in major adverse events.
Topics: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Catheter Ablation; Hospitalization; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33909022
DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2021.0852 -
Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Jan 2021Recently, smart devices have been used for medical purposes, particularly to screen for atrial fibrillation. However, current data on the diagnostic performance of these... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Recently, smart devices have been used for medical purposes, particularly to screen for atrial fibrillation. However, current data on the diagnostic performance of these devices are scarce.
AIMS
We performed a systemic review and meta-analysis to assess the accuracy of atrial fibrillation diagnosis by smart gadgets/wearable devices.
METHODS
We comprehensively searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases for all works since the inception of each database until January 2020. Included in this review were published observational studies of the diagnostic accuracy of smartphones or smartwatches in detecting atrial fibrillation. We calculated the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves and pooled sensitivities and specificities.
RESULTS
Participants in our study were from the general population or were patients with underlying atrial fibrillation. In the overall analyses, the areas under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves were 0.96 and 0.94 for smartphones and smartwatches, respectively. Smartphones had a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 96%, and smartwatches showed similar diagnostic accuracy, with a specificity of 94% and a sensitivity of 93%. In subgroup analyses, we found no difference in diagnostic accuracy between photoplethysmography and single-lead electrocardiography.
CONCLUSIONS
This study suggests that smart devices have similar diagnostic accuracies. Regarding atrial fibrillation detection methods, there was also no difference between photoplethysmography and single-lead electrocardiography. However, further studies are warranted to determine their clinical implications in atrial fibrillation management.
Topics: Action Potentials; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Atrial Fibrillation; Female; Heart Conduction System; Heart Rate; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mobile Applications; Predictive Value of Tests; Reproducibility of Results; Smartphone; Telemetry; Wearable Electronic Devices; Wireless Technology
PubMed: 32921618
DOI: 10.1016/j.acvd.2020.05.015 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2017Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation may benefit adults with atrial fibrillation or those who had been treated for atrial fibrillation. Atrial fibrillation is caused by... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation may benefit adults with atrial fibrillation or those who had been treated for atrial fibrillation. Atrial fibrillation is caused by multiple micro re-entry circuits within the atrial tissue, which result in chaotic rapid activity in the atria.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of exercise-based rehabilitation programmes, alone or with another intervention, compared with no-exercise training controls in adults who currently have AF, or have been treated for AF.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases; CENTRAL and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, PsycINFO Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection Thomson Reuters, CINAHL EBSCO, LILACS Bireme, and three clinical trial registers on 14 July 2016. We also checked the bibliographies of relevant systematic reviews identified by the searches. We imposed no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) that investigated exercise-based interventions compared with any type of no-exercise control. We included trials that included adults aged 18 years or older with atrial fibrillation, or post-treatment for atrial fibrillation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently extracted data. We assessed the risk of bias using the domains outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We assessed clinical and statistical heterogeneity by visual inspection of the forest plots, and by using standard Chi² and I² statistics. We performed meta-analyses using fixed-effect and random-effects models; we used standardised mean differences where different scales were used for the same outcome. We assessed the risk of random errors with trial sequential analysis (TSA) and used the GRADE methodology to rate the quality of evidence, reporting it in the 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six RCTs with a total of 421 patients with various types of atrial fibrillation. All trials were conducted between 2006 and 2016, and had short follow-up (eight weeks to six months). Risks of bias ranged from high risk to low risk.The exercise-based programmes in four trials consisted of both aerobic exercise and resistance training, in one trial consisted of Qi-gong (slow and graceful movements), and in another trial, consisted of inspiratory muscle training.For mortality, very low-quality evidence from six trials suggested no clear difference in deaths between the exercise and no-exercise groups (relative risk (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 15.78; participants = 421; I² = 0%; deaths = 2). Very low-quality evidence from five trials suggested no clear difference between groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05; participants = 381; I² = 0%; events = 8). Low-quality evidence from two trials suggested no clear difference in health-related quality of life for the Short Form-36 (SF-36) physical component summary measure (mean difference (MD) 1.96, 95% CI -2.50 to 6.42; participants = 224; I² = 69%), or the SF-36 mental component summary measure (MD 1.99, 95% CI -0.48 to 4.46; participants = 224; I² = 0%). Exercise capacity was assessed by cumulated work, or maximal power (Watt), obtained by cycle ergometer, or by six minute walking test, or ergospirometry testing measuring VO2 peak. We found moderate-quality evidence from two studies that exercise-based rehabilitation increased exercise capacity, measured by VO2 peak, more than no exercise (MD 3.76, 95% CI 1.37 to 6.15; participants = 208; I² = 0%); and very low-quality evidence from four studies that exercise-based rehabilitation increased exercise capacity more than no exercise, measured by the six-minute walking test (MD 75.76, 95% CI 14.00 to 137.53; participants = 272; I² = 85%). When we combined the different assessment tools for exercise capacity, we found very low-quality evidence from six trials that exercise-based rehabilitation increased exercise capacity more than no exercise (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.26; participants = 359; I² = 65%). Overall, the quality of the evidence for the outcomes ranged from moderate to very-low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Due to few randomised patients and outcomes, we could not evaluate the real impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation on mortality or serious adverse events. The evidence showed no clinically relevant effect on health-related quality of life. Pooled data showed a positive effect on the surrogate outcome of physical exercise capacity, but due to the low number of patients and the moderate to very low-quality of the underpinning evidence, we could not be certain of the magnitude of the effect. Future high-quality randomised trials are needed to assess the benefits and harms of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults with atrial fibrillation on patient-relevant outcomes.
Topics: Adult; Atrial Fibrillation; Cardiac Rehabilitation; Exercise Therapy; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Qigong; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Resistance Training
PubMed: 28181684
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011197.pub2 -
Journal of Cardiology Nov 2021The aim of this meta-analysis is to investigate the effectiveness of intravenous magnesium (IV Mg) in rate and rhythm control of rapid atrial fibrillation (AF) when... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The aim of this meta-analysis is to investigate the effectiveness of intravenous magnesium (IV Mg) in rate and rhythm control of rapid atrial fibrillation (AF) when administered in addition to standard-of-care for non-post-operative patients. Previous meta-analyses on this topic have demonstrated the efficacy of IV Mg in achieving rate control, but not rhythm control.
METHODS
Six randomized controlled trials comparing IV Mg to placebo in the treatment of rapid AF were obtained from electronic databases totaling 745 patients. Outcomes were analyzed using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model and expressed as odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous outcomes with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Our pooled analysis showed that IV Mg given in addition to standard-of-care was superior in achieving rate control (63% vs 40%; OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.80-3.45) and rhythm conversion to sinus (21% vs. 14%, OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.08-2.84) compared to standard-of-care alone. Flushing was more frequently observed in patients receiving IV Mg compared to placebo (9% vs. 0.4%, OR 19.79, 95% CI 4.30-91.21). Subgroup analysis showed the superiority of a lower dose of IV Mg, which we designated as 5 g or lower (24% vs 13%, OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.22-3.61) compared to the higher dose (>5 g) (16% vs 13%, OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.65-2.32) in rhythm control when compared to placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
IV Mg administered in conjunction with standard-of-care is effective for rate control and modestly effective for restoration of sinus rhythm in rapid AF without clinically significant adverse effects.
Topics: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Humans; Magnesium; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34162502
DOI: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2021.06.001 -
Journal of the American College of... May 2023Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is a commonly performed procedure. However, it is associated with potentially significant complications. Reported...
BACKGROUND
Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is a commonly performed procedure. However, it is associated with potentially significant complications. Reported procedure-related complication rates are highly variable, depending in part on study design.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this systematic review and pooled analysis was to determine the rate of procedure-related complications associated with catheter ablation of AF using data from randomized control trials and to assess temporal trends.
METHODS
MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from January 2013 to September 2022 for randomized control trials that included patients undergoing a first ablation procedure of AF using either radiofrequency or cryoballoon (PROSPERO, CRD42022370273).
RESULTS
A total of 1,468 references were retrieved, of which 89 studies met inclusion criteria. A total of 15,701 patients were included in the current analysis. Overall and severe procedure-related complication rates were 4.51% (95% CI: 3.76%-5.32%) and 2.44% (95% CI: 1.98%-2.93%), respectively. Vascular complications were the most frequent type of complication (1.31%). The next most common complications were pericardial effusion/tamponade (0.78%) and stroke/transient ischemic attack (0.17%). The procedure-related complication rate during the most recent 5-year period of publication was significantly lower than during the earlier 5-year period (3.77% vs 5.31%; P = 0.043). The pooled mortality rate was stable over the 2 time periods (0.06% vs 0.05%; P = 0.892). There was no significant difference in complication rate according to pattern of AF, ablation modality, or ablation strategies beyond pulmonary vein isolation.
CONCLUSIONS
Procedure-related complications and mortality rates associated with catheter ablation of AF are low and have declined in the past decade.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Cardiac Tamponade; Catheter Ablation; Databases, Factual; Ischemic Attack, Transient
PubMed: 37225362
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2023.03.418 -
Heart (British Cardiac Society) Jan 2023There has been limited systematic evaluation of outcomes and drivers of inappropriate non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) dosing among patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Outcomes and drivers of inappropriate dosing of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
There has been limited systematic evaluation of outcomes and drivers of inappropriate non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) dosing among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This review identified and systematically evaluated literature on clinical and economic outcomes of inappropriate NOAC dosing and associated patient characteristics.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Econlit, PubMed and NHS EEDs databases were searched for English language observational studies from all geographies published between 2008 and 2020, examining outcomes of, or factors associated with, inappropriate NOAC dosing in adult patients with AF.
RESULTS
One hundred and six studies were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis showed that compared with recommended NOAC dosing, off-label underdosing was associated with a null effect on stroke outcomes (ischaemic stroke and stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA), stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and stroke/SE/TIA). Meta-analysis of 15 studies examining clinical outcomes of inappropriate NOAC dosing found a null effect of underdosing on bleeding outcomes (major bleeding HR=1.04, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.19; p=0.625) but an increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR=1.28, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.49; p=0.006). Overdosing was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (HR=1.41, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.85; p=0.013). No studies were found examining economic outcomes of inappropriate NOAC dosing. Narrative synthesis of 12 studies examining drivers of inappropriate NOAC dosing found that increased age, history of minor bleeds, hypertension, congestive heart failure and low creatine clearance (CrCl) were associated with an increased risk of underdosing. There was insufficient evidence to assess drivers of overdosing.
CONCLUSIONS
Our analysis suggests that off-label underdosing of NOACs does not reduce bleeding outcomes. Patients prescribed off-label NOAC doses are at an increased risk of all-cause mortality. These data underscore the importance of prescriber adherence to NOAC dosing guidelines to achieve optimal clinical outcomes for patients with AF.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42020219844.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Stroke; Administration, Oral; Brain Ischemia; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Hemorrhage; Embolism
PubMed: 36316100
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321114 -
Thrombosis and Haemostasis Mar 2022The 'Atrial fibrillation Better Care' (ABC) pathway has been recently proposed as a holistic approach for the comprehensive management of patients with atrial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Adherence to the 'Atrial Fibrillation Better Care' Pathway in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Impact on Clinical Outcomes-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 285,000 Patients.
OBJECTIVE
The 'Atrial fibrillation Better Care' (ABC) pathway has been recently proposed as a holistic approach for the comprehensive management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We performed a systematic review of current evidence for the use of the ABC pathway on clinical outcomes.
METHODS AND RESULTS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for studies reporting the prevalence of ABC-pathway-adherent management in AF patients, and its impact on clinical outcomes (all-cause death, cardiovascular death, stroke, and major bleeding). Meta-analysis of odds ratio (OR) was performed with random-effects models; subgroup analysis and meta-regression were performed to account for heterogeneity. Among the eight studies included, we found a pooled prevalence of ABC-adherent management of 21% (95% confidence interval, CI: 13-34%), with a high grade of heterogeneity, explained by the increasing adherence to each ABC criterion. Patients treated according to the ABC pathway showed a lower risk of all-cause death (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.31-0.56), cardiovascular death (OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.23-0.58), stroke (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.37-0.82) and major bleeding (OR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.51-0.94), with moderate heterogeneity. Prevalence of comorbidities was moderators of heterogeneity for all-cause and cardiovascular death, while longer follow-up was associated with increased effectiveness for all outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Adherence to the ABC pathway was suboptimal, being adopted in one in every five patients. Adherence to the ABC pathway was associated with a reduction in the risk of major adverse outcomes.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Critical Pathways; Guideline Adherence; Hemorrhage; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Stroke
PubMed: 34020488
DOI: 10.1055/a-1515-9630 -
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia Jul 2022Catheter ablation is a well-established therapy for rhythm control in patients who are refractory or intolerant to anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD). Less is known about the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Catheter ablation is a well-established therapy for rhythm control in patients who are refractory or intolerant to anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD). Less is known about the efficacy of catheter ablation compared with AAD as a first-line strategy for rhythm control in atrial fibrillation (AF).
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of catheter ablation vs. AAD in patients naïve to prior rhythm control therapies.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared catheter ablation to AAD for initial rhythm control in symptomatic AF and reported the outcomes of (1) recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATs); (2) symptomatic AF; (3) hospitalizations; and (4) symptomatic bradycardia. Heterogeneity was examined with I2statistics. P values of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
We included five trials with 994 patients, of whom 502 (50.5%) underwent catheter ablation. Mean follow-up ranged from one to five years. Recurrences of AT (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.25-0.52; p<0.001) and symptomatic AF (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.18-0.57; p<0.001), and hospitalizations (OR 0.25; 95% CI 0.15-0.42; p<0.001) were significantly less frequent in patients treated with catheter ablation compared with AAD. Symptomatic bradycardia was not significantly different between groups (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.18-1.65; p=0.28). Significant pericardial effusions or tamponade occurred in eight of 464 (1.7%) patients in the catheter ablation group.
CONCLUSION
These findings suggest that catheter ablation has superior efficacy to AAD as an initial rhythm control strategy in patients with symptomatic AF.
Topics: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Catheter Ablation; Heart Atria; Humans; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35830118
DOI: 10.36660/abc.20210477