-
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Jun 2024Catheter ablation and antiarrhythmic drug therapy are utilized for rhythm control in atrial fibrillation (AF), but their comparative effectiveness, especially with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Catheter ablation and antiarrhythmic drug therapy are utilized for rhythm control in atrial fibrillation (AF), but their comparative effectiveness, especially with contemporary treatment modalities, remains undefined. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis contrasting current ablation techniques against antiarrhythmic medications for AF.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science until November 2023 for randomized trials comparing AF catheter ablation with antiarrhythmics, against antiarrhythmic drug therapy alone, reporting outcomes for > 6 months. Four investigators extracted data and appraised risk of bias (ROB) with ROB 2 tool. Meta-analyses estimated pooled efficacy and safety outcomes using R software.
RESULTS
Twelve trials (n = 3977) met the inclusion criteria. Catheter ablation was associated with lower AF recurrence (relative risk (RR) = 0.44, 95%CI (0.33, 0.59), P ˂ 0.0001) and hospitalizations (RR = 0.44, 95%CI (0.23, 0.82), P = 0.009) than antiarrhythmic medications. Catheter ablation also improved the physical quality of life component score (assessed by a 36-item Short Form survey) by 7.61 points (95%CI -0.70-15.92, P = 0.07); but, due to high heterogeneity, it was not statistically significant. Ablation was significantly associated with higher procedural-related complications [RR = 15.70, 95%CI (4.53, 54.38), P < 0.0001] and cardiac tamponade [RR = 9.22, 95%CI (2.16, 39.40), P = 0.0027]. All-cause mortality was similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
For symptomatic AF, upfront catheter ablation reduces arrhythmia and hospitalizations better than continued medical therapy alone, albeit with moderately more adverse events. Careful patient selection and risk-benefit assessment are warranted regarding the timing of ablation.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Catheter Ablation; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Treatment Outcome; Recurrence; Risk Factors; Middle Aged; Female; Male; Heart Rate; Aged; Quality of Life; Time Factors; Risk Assessment; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38918704
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-024-03983-z -
Cureus May 2024Atrial fibrillation (AF) management has witnessed a paradigm shift, with an increasing emphasis on rhythm control strategies. This systematic review aims to... (Review)
Review
Atrial fibrillation (AF) management has witnessed a paradigm shift, with an increasing emphasis on rhythm control strategies. This systematic review aims to comprehensively assess and compare the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation versus medical therapy in the treatment of AF. A systematic search was conducted across major electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, from inception to the present. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing catheter ablation with medical therapy for AF were included. The primary outcomes included rhythm control success, recurrence rates, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes encompassed quality of life, hospitalization rates, and mortality. A total of six studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 2,859 participants. Catheter ablation significantly improved rhythm control success compared to medical therapy. Subgroup analyses demonstrated variations in outcomes based on patient characteristics, procedural techniques, and follow-up durations. Recurrence rates favored ablation; however, ablation was associated with a higher incidence of minor complications and major adverse events. Catheter ablation demonstrates superior efficacy in achieving and maintaining rhythm control compared to medical therapy in the management of AF. Despite the increased risk of procedural complications, the overall safety profile remains acceptable. This systematic review provides valuable insights for clinicians and informs shared decision-making between patients and healthcare providers when choosing between catheter ablation and medical therapy for AF treatment.
PubMed: 38883117
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.60340 -
JAMA Cardiology Jun 2024Catheter ablation is associated with reduced heart failure (HF) hospitalization and death in select patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Catheter ablation is associated with reduced heart failure (HF) hospitalization and death in select patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the benefit in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is uncertain.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate whether catheter ablation for AF is associated with reduced HF-related outcomes according to HF phenotype.
DATA SOURCE
A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central was conducted among studies published from inception to September 2023.
STUDY SELECTION
Parallel-group randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing catheter ablation with conventional rate or rhythm control therapies in patients with HF, New York Heart Association functional class II or greater, and a history of paroxysmal or persistent AF were included. Pairs of independent reviewers screened 7531 titles and abstracts, of which 12 RCTs and 4 substudies met selection criteria.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were abstracted in duplicate according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using random-effects Mantel-Haenszel models. Interaction P values were used to test for subgroup differences.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was HF events, defined as HF hospitalization, clinically significant worsening of HF, or unscheduled visits to a clinician for treatment intensification. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular and all-cause mortality.
RESULTS
A total of 12 RCTs with 2465 participants (mean [SD] age, 65.3 [9.7] years; 658 females [26.7%]) were included; there were 1552 participants with HFrEF and 913 participants with HFpEF. Compared with conventional rate or rhythm control, catheter ablation was associated with reduced risk of HF events in HFrEF (risk ratio [RR], 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.72), while there was no benefit in patients with HFpEF (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.65-1.32) (P for interaction = .03). Catheter ablation was associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular death compared with conventional therapies in HFrEF (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.34-0.70) but a differential association was not detected in HFpEF (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.46-1.79) (P for interaction = .12). Similarly, no difference in the association of catheter ablation with all-cause mortality was found between HFrEF (RR vs conventional therapies, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.86) and HFpEF (RR vs conventional therapies, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.39-2.30) groups (P for interaction = .39).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This study found that catheter ablation for AF was associated with reduced risk of HF events in patients with HFrEF but had limited or no benefit in HFpEF. Results from ongoing trials may further elucidate the role of catheter ablation for AF in HFpEF.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Catheter Ablation; Heart Failure; Stroke Volume
PubMed: 38656292
DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2024.0675 -
Medicine Apr 2024Tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome (TBS) is a subtype of sick sinus syndrome characterized by prolonged sinus pause (≥3 s) following termination of tachyarrhythmias,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome (TBS) is a subtype of sick sinus syndrome characterized by prolonged sinus pause (≥3 s) following termination of tachyarrhythmias, primarily atrial fibrillation (AF). There is controversy regarding whether the long-term prognosis of AF ablation is superior to pacemaker implantation. This study aimed to compare the effects of AF ablation and pacemaker therapy in patients with TBS.
METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive search of electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, EmBase, Web of Science, and Chinese BioMedical, up until December 1, 2023. We included studies that reported the effects of AF ablation vs pacemaker therapy in patients with TBS. From this search, we identified 5 studies comprising 843 participants with TBS who underwent catheter AF ablation or pacemaker therapy.
RESULTS
Our meta-analysis revealed that AF ablation and pacemaker therapy had similar effects on cardiovascular death (odds ratio [OR] = 0.62 and 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.14-2.65), procedural complications (OR = 1.53 and 95% CI: 0.67-3.48), and cardiovascular rehospitalization (OR = 0.57 and 95% CI: 0.26-1.22). However, AF ablation provided greater benefits than pacemaker therapy in terms of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.37 and 95% CI: 0.17-0.82), thromboembolism (OR = 0.25 and 95% CI: 0.12-0.49), stroke (OR = 0.28 and 95% CI: 0.13-0.57), heart failure (OR = 0.27 and 95% CI: 0.13-0.56), freedom from AF (OR = 23.32 and 95% CI: 7.46-72.92), and prevention of progression to persistent AF (OR = 0.12 and 95% CI: 0.06-0.24). Furthermore, AF ablation resulted in a reduced need for antiarrhythmic agents (OR = 0.21 and 95% CI: 0.08-0.59).
CONCLUSION
AF ablation can effectively reduce the risk of all-cause mortality, thromboembolism, stroke, heart failure, and progression to persistent AF in patients with TBS. Additionally, it may eliminate the need for further pacemaker therapy in most cases after ablation. Therefore, AF ablation is considered superior to pacemaker therapy in the management of patients with TBS.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Sick Sinus Syndrome; Bradycardia; Treatment Outcome; Pacemaker, Artificial; Tachycardia; Catheter Ablation; Stroke; Heart Failure; Thromboembolism
PubMed: 38640303
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000037543 -
Heart Rhythm Apr 2024The benefit of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The benefit of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain.
OBJECTIVE
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare catheter ablation and medical therapy (antiarrhythmics for rhythm or rate control) in patients with AF and HFpEF.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Outcomes were the composite end points of death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization, all-cause death, cardiovascular death, all-cause rehospitalization, and HF hospitalization. Statistical analysis was performed using R statistical software, version 4.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Heterogeneity was assessed with I statistics.
RESULTS
We included 20,257 patients from 8 studies. Of those, 3 were derived from RCTs, either through post hoc analysis or subgroup analysis, and 5 were observational studies. The median follow-up ranged from 24.6 to 61.2 months. Compared with medical therapy, catheter ablation was associated with a statistically significant lower risk of death or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.83; P = .001; I = 66%), all-cause death (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.46-0.99; P = .047; I = 61%), cardiovascular death (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.21-0.84; P = .014; I = 22%), and HF hospitalization (HR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23-0.82; P = .011; I = 87%).
CONCLUSION
In this meta-analysis, catheter ablation was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, and all-cause rehospitalization in comparison to medical therapy in patients with AF and HFpEF.
PubMed: 38621498
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.04.058 -
Acta Radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden :... Jun 2024The crista terminalis is an anatomical structure localized on the posterolateral wall of the right atrium (RA). We performed a systematic review of the literature and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The crista terminalis is an anatomical structure localized on the posterolateral wall of the right atrium (RA). We performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis concerning cases of unusual prominent crista terminalis mimicking RA mass. Moreover, we described the differential diagnosis of cardiac masses with the use of echocardiography, computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). We also emphasize the potential importance of this structure in electrophysiological procedures, including its role in exaggerated arrhythmias. Prominent crista terminalis may be a potential obstacle during invasive cardiac procedures or catheter ablation target. In analyzed cases, the crista terminalis was often erroneously interpreted as pathologic and at first confused with a thrombus or tumor during transthoracic echocardiography examination. The correct final diagnoses were mostly made with used transesophageal echocardiography or CMR. The most important imaging findings suggestive of prominent crista terminalis rather than tumor were a similar echogenicity/intensity with adjacent myocardium, the location on posterolateral wall of the RA, the phasic change in size, and no enhancement after contrast injection. We describe up to date and detailed imaging features for the differential diagnostics of selected intracardiac masses using various imaging techniques, including multimodality cardiac imaging. Familiarity with the anatomy and the imaging findings of the prominent crista terminalis will reduce misdiagnosis and avoid additional tests and unwarranted clinical interventions, while in patients considered for invasive cardiac procedures it might increase their efficacy and safety.
Topics: Humans; Diagnosis, Differential; Heart Atria; Heart Neoplasms; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Echocardiography
PubMed: 38619912
DOI: 10.1177/02841851241242461 -
Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery Mar 2024Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common form of cardiac arrythmia, with a key importance in the perioperative setting of cardiac surgery. In recent years, the...
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common form of cardiac arrythmia, with a key importance in the perioperative setting of cardiac surgery. In recent years, the question as to whether pre-existent AF should be treated concomitantly when undergoing cardiac surgery has been heatedly debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to delineate the outcomes of patients undergoing concomitant AF ablation procedures alongside cardiac surgery.
METHODS
The methods for this systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. Four databases were searched, ultimately yielding 22 papers for inclusion, using appropriate search terminology. Meta-analysis using proportions or means, as appropriate, were applied. Kaplan-Meier curves were digitized and aggregated using previously reported and validated techniques.
RESULTS
A total of 9,428 patients (67% male) were identified across the study period as having received non-mitral cardiac surgery and concomitant AF ablation procedures. On actuarial assessment, freedom from AF was found to be 93%, 88%, 85%, 82%, and 79% at 1 through to 5 years, respectively. Freedom from mortality was found to be 94%, 93%, 91%, 90%, and 87% at 1 through to 5 years, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
This review demonstrated excellent freedom from AF out to a long-term follow-up of 5 years. Freedom from mortality was also encouraging. Emerging data are increasingly illustrating that in this patient cohort, concurrent treatment of pre-existent AF with cardiac and/or valvular disease at the point of operation should be the standard of care. Robust data in the form of randomized control trials will hopefully solidify this assertion.
PubMed: 38590993
DOI: 10.21037/acs-2023-afm-17 -
Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery Mar 2024Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia, and is also associated with mitral valve disease. Although the benefits of robotic mitral valve surgery are well...
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia, and is also associated with mitral valve disease. Although the benefits of robotic mitral valve surgery are well documented, literature combining robotic mitral valve surgery with AF surgery remains sparse. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the evidence assessing the efficacy and safety of AF ablation during robotic mitral valve surgery.
METHODS
Five electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2023. All studies reporting the primary outcome, freedom from AF, for patients with a history of AF undergoing robotic mitral valve surgery and AF ablation were identified. Studies which included mixed cohorts, or patients who did not undergo robotic mitral valve surgery were excluded. Relevant data were extracted and a meta-analysis of proportions was conducted using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Five studies were included with a total of 241 patients. Cohort sizes ranged from 11 to 94 patients. The aggregate mean age was 58.5 years and patients had persistent AF (71.1%). All five studies utilised the da Vinci Surgical System, and performed variable lesion sets. The freedom from AF was 88.1% at a weighted mean follow-up of 6.9 months. There were two mortalities (0.8%), two patients required conversion to sternotomy (1.4%) and eight required a permanent pacemaker (3.7%).
CONCLUSIONS
AF ablation with robotic mitral valve surgery can be performed with adequate short-term efficacy and safety profile. Current evidence on AF ablation and robotic mitral valve surgery is limited to low-quality retrospective data with inherent selection bias. Further large-scale prospective data is required to verify these results.
PubMed: 38590987
DOI: 10.21037/acs-2023-afm-20 -
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology :... May 2024The use of esophageal temperature monitoring (ETM) for the prevention of esophageal injury during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is often advocated. However, evidence... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The use of esophageal temperature monitoring (ETM) for the prevention of esophageal injury during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is often advocated. However, evidence supporting its use is scarce and controversial. We therefore aimed to review the evidence assessing the efficacy of ETM for the prevention of esophageal injury.
METHODS
We performed a meta-analysis and systematic review of the available literature from inception to December 31, 2022. All studies comparing the use of ETM, versus no ETM, during radiofrequency (RF) AF ablation and which reported the incidence of endoscopically detected esophageal lesions (EDELs) were included.
RESULTS
Eleven studies with a total of 1112 patients undergoing RF AF ablation were identified. Of those patients, 627 were assigned to ETM (56%). The overall incidence of EDELs was 9.8%. The use of ETM during AF ablation was associated with a non significant increase in the incidence of EDELs (12.3% with ETM, vs. 6.6 % without ETM, odds ratio, 1.44, 95%CI, 0.49, 4.22, p = .51, I= 72%). The use of ETM was associated with a significant increase in the energy delivered specifically on the posterior wall compared to patients without ETM (mean power difference: 5.13 Watts, 95% CI, 1.52, 8.74, p = .005).
CONCLUSIONS
The use of ETM does not reduce the incidence of EDELs during RF AF ablation. The higher energy delivered on the posterior wall is likely attributable to a false sense of safety that may explain the lack of benefit of ETM. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to provide conclusive results.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Catheter Ablation; Esophagus; Body Temperature; Monitoring, Intraoperative; Intraoperative Complications
PubMed: 38558218
DOI: 10.1111/pace.14972 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery Mar 2024Cox-Maze procedure is currently the gold standard treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, data on the effectiveness of the Cox-Maze procedure after concomitant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cox-Maze procedure is currently the gold standard treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, data on the effectiveness of the Cox-Maze procedure after concomitant mitral valve surgery (MVS) are not well established. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of Cox-Maze procedure versus no-maze procedure n in AF patients undergoing mitral valve surgery through a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.
METHODS
A systematic search on PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (Cochrane Library, Issue 02, 2017) databases were performed using three databases from their inception to March 2023, identifying all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Cox-Maze procedure versus no procedure in AF patients undergoing mitral valve surgery. Data were extracted and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this systematic review with 663 patients in total (341 concomitant Cox-Maze with MVS and 322 MVS alone). Across all studies with included AF patients undergoing MV surgery, the concomitant Cox-Maze procedure was associated with significantly higher sinus rhythm rate at discharge, 6 months, and 12 months follow-up when compared with the no-Maze group. Results indicated that there was no significant difference between the Cox-Maze and no-Maze groups in terms of 1 year all-cause mortality, pacemaker implantation, stroke, and thromboembolism.
CONCLUSIONS
Our systematic review suggested that RCTs have demonstrated the addition of the Cox-Maze procedure for AF leads to a significantly higher rate of sinus rhythm in mitral valve surgical patients, with no increase in the rates of mortality, pacemaker implantation, stroke, and thromboembolism.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Mitral Valve; Maze Procedure; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Catheter Ablation
PubMed: 38504314
DOI: 10.1186/s13019-024-02622-0