Catheter ablation versus medical therapy in atrial fibrillation: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Titus A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10902941 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:AimsThe recurrence rates after catheter ablation (CA) and direct current (DC) cardioversion remain high, although they have been established treatments of rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF). This umbrella review systematically appraises published meta-analyses of both observational and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the association of risk and protective factors for arrhythmia recurrence after CA and DC cardioversion of AF.Methods and resultsThree bibliographic databases were searched up to June 2021. Evidence of association was rated as convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant with respect to observational studies and as high, moderate, low, or very low with respect to RCTs, according to established criteria. Thirty-one meta-analyses were included. Of the 28 associations between CA and the risk of arrhythmia recurrence, none presented convincing evidence, and only the time from diagnosis to ablation over 1 year provided highly suggestive evidence. The association between hypertension and metabolic profile provided suggestive evidence. The associations of Class IC and III antiarrhythmic drugs use with the recurrence after DC cardioversion were supported by an intermediate level of evidence.ConclusionAlthough AF is a major health issue, few risk- and protective factors for AF recurrence have been identified. None of these factors examined were supported by convincing evidence, whereas established factors such as female gender and left atrial volume showed only weak association. An early CA strategy combined with treatment of metabolic syndrome and hypertension prior to CA may reduce the risk of arrhythmia recurrence. The use of antiarrhythmics can increase the success rate of DC cardioversion.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO registry number: CRD42021270613.
| S-EPMC10103559 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCatheter ablation has shown to reduce mortality in patient with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. Its effect on mortality in patients without HF has not been well elucidated.MethodsThirteen randomized controlled trials encompassing 3856 patients were selected using PubMed, Embase and the CENTRAL till April 2019. Estimates were reported as random effects risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsCompared with medical therapy, catheter ablation did not reduce the risk of all-cause mortality (RR, 0.86, 95% CI, 0.62-1.19, P=0.36; I2=0), stroke (RR, 0.55, 95% CI, 0.18-1.66, P=0.29; I2=0), need for cardioversion (RR, 0.84, 95% CI, 0.66-1.08, P=0.17; I2=0) or pacemaker (RR, 0.59, 95% CI, 0.34-1.01, P=0.06; I2=0). However, ablation reduced the RR of cardiac hospitalization (0.37, 95% CI, 0.18-0.77, P=0.01; I2=86), and recurrent atrial arrhythmia (0.46, 95% CI, 0.35-0.60, P<0.001; I2=87). There were non-significant differences among treatment groups with respect to major bleeding (RR, 1.89, 95% CI, 0.59-6.08, P=0.29; I2=15), and pulmonary vein stenosis (RR, 3.00, 95% CI, 0.83-10.87, P=0.09; I2=0), but had significantly higher rates of pericardial tamponade (RR, 4.46, 95 % CI, 1.70-11.72, P<0.001; I2=0).ConclusionsCatheter ablation did not improve survival compared with medical therapy in patients with AF without HF. Catheter ablation reduced cardiac hospitalization and recurrent atrial arrhythmia at the expense of pericardial tamponade.
| S-EPMC7533121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of the present study was to compare the health outcomes of catheter ablation therapy against those of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in the management of atrial fibrillation (AF). The effects of catheter ablation and AADs on a number of parameters were compared, including AF recurrence, all-cause mortality, stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) and quality of life (QoL). A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted to obtain relevant randomized controlled trials. The relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of AF recurrence, all-cause mortality and stroke/TIA between catheter ablation and AADs were subsequently calculated. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% CIs were used to evaluate the QoL between the two therapy groups. In total, 11 randomized trials, which included 1,763 AF patients, were eligible for the meta-analysis. Overall, the results indicated that catheter ablation produces superior outcomes compared with AADs in reducing AF recurrence (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.38-0.58; P<0.001) and improving the QoL (physical component summary: WMD, 2.23; 95% CI, 0.24-4.21; P=0.03; mental component summary: WMD, 2.69; 95% CI, 0.04-5.35; P=0.05). However, no statistically significant difference was identified between the two groups with regard to the incidence of all-cause mortality (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.37-2.06; P=0.76) and stroke/TIA (RR, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.73-4.55; P=0.20). In summary, catheter ablation was demonstrated to markedly reduce AF recurrence and improve QoL when compared with AAD therapy. However, the incidence rates of all-cause mortality and stroke/TIA were comparable between catheter ablation and AAD therapy.
| S-EPMC4508979 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) often coexist and synergistically contribute to an increased risk of hospitalization, stroke, and mortality.ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of catheter ablation (CA) versus medical therapy (MT) in HF patients with AF.MethodsElectronic databases were queried for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CA versus MT of AF in patients with HF. Risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were measured using the Mantel-Haenszel method.ResultsA total of nine RCTs enrolling 2155 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared to MT, CA led to a significant reduction in the composite of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization (24.6% vs. 37.1%; RR: 0.65 (95% CI: 0.53-0.80); p < 0.0001), all-cause mortality (8.8% vs. 13.6%; RR: 0.65 (95% CI: 0.51-0.82); p = 0.0005), HF hospitalization (15.4% vs. 22.4%; (RR: 0.67 (95% CI: 0.54-0.82); p = 0.0001), AF recurrence (31.8% vs. 77.0%; RR: 0.36 (95% CI: 0.24-0.54); p < 0.0001), and cardiovascular (CV) death (4.9% vs. 8.4%; RR: 0.58 (95% CI: 0.39-0.86); p = 0.007). CA improved the left ventricular ejection fraction (MD:4.76% (95% CI: 2.35-7.18); p = 0.0001), 6 min walk test (MD: 20.48 m (95% CI: 10.83-30.14); p < 0.0001), peak oxygen consumption (MD: 3.1 2mL/kg/min (95% CI: 1.01-5.22); p = 0.004), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score (MD: -6.98 (95% CI: -12-03, -1.93); p = 0.007), and brain natriuretic peptide levels (MD:-133.94 pg/mL (95% CI: -197.33, -70.55); p < 0.0001).ConclusionsIn HF patients, AF catheter ablation was superior to MT in reducing CV and all-cause mortality. Further significant benefits occurred within the ablation group in terms of HF hospitalizations, AF recurrences, the systolic function, exercise capacity, and quality of life.
| S-EPMC9572511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionEndocardial catheter ablation (ECA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) has limited efficacy. Hybrid convergent procedure (HCP) with both epicardial and endocardial ablation is a novel strategy for AF treatment. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HCP in AF ablation.MethodWe performed a comprehensive literature search for studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of HCP compared with ECA for AF. The primary outcome was freedom of atrial arrhythmia (AA). The secondary outcome was the periprocedural complication rate. Pooled relative risk (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random effects model.ResultsA total of eight studies, including 797 AF patients (mean age: 60.7 ± 9.8 years, 366 patients with HCP vs. 431 patients with ECA alone), were included. HCP showed a higher rate of freedom of AA compared with ECA (RR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.13-1.94, p = .004). However, HCP was associated with higher rates of periprocedural complications (RR: 3.64, 95% CI: 2.06-6.43; p = .00001). Moreover, the HCP had a longer procedure time and postprocedural hospital stay.ConclusionsAlthough hybrid ablation was associated with a higher success rate, this should be judged for increased periprocedural adverse events and extended hospital stay. Prospective large-scale randomized trials are needed to validate these results.
| S-EPMC8637076 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Our study aims to elucidate the role of lncRNA-mRNA regulatory networks in AF recurrence after catheter ablation. We performed RNA sequencing to profile the transcriptomes of 5 samples from atrial fibrillation recurrence and 5 samples from sinus rhythm maintenance. 96 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and 203 differentially expressed long non-coding RNAs (DE-lncRNAs) were identified between atrial fibrillation recurrence group and sinus rhythm maintenance group. Gene Ontology (GO) analysis showed that DEGs were enriched in “regulation of immune response”, and “regulation of immune system process” for biological processes (BP), enriched in “extracellular matrix”, “cell-cell junction” for cellular components (CC), and enriched in “signaling adaptor activity”, “protein-macromolecule adaptor activity” for molecular functions (MF). For KEGG analysis, DEGs are associated with “PI3K-Akt signaling pathway”, “MAPK signaling pathway”. 9 hub genes (MMP9, IGF2, FGFR1, HSPG2, GZMB, PEG10, GNLY, COL6A1, and KCNE3) were identified through the Protein-Protein Interaction network. LncRNA-TMEM51-AS1-201 was identified as a core regulator and may impact AF recurrence after catheter ablation by regulating “COL6A1, FGFR1, HSPG2, and IGF2.”
2024-04-24 | GSE245886 | GEO
Project description:BackgroundThe prevailing view is that ablation does not reduce the incidence of stroke and deaths in atrial fibrillation (AF), and guidelines suggest that long-term anticoagulation is required after ablation, regardless of the success of the procedure. We performed a meta-analysis of recent randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) to verify whether ablation compared with drugs reduced the incidence of stroke and deaths.MethodsWe systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for RCTs of AF catheter ablation (CA) compared to medical therapy (MT). The risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CIs were calculated using a random-effects model. A trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to further validate the reliability of the primary outcomes.ResultsSeventeen RCTs were included, comprising 5,258 patients (CA, n = 2760; MT, n = 2498). Compared with medical therapy, CA was associated with a reduction in stroke/transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs) (p = 0.035; RR = 0.61 [95% CI, 0.386 to 0.965]; I2 = 0.0%) and deaths (p = 0.004; RR = 0.7 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.89]; I2 = 0.0%). CA was associated with improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (p = 0.000; WMD = 5.39 [95% CI, 2.45 to 8.32]; I2 = 84.4%) and the rate of maintenance of sinus rhythm (SR) (p = 0.000; RR = 3.55 [95% CI, 2.34 to 5.40]; I2 = 76.7%).ConclusionsCA for AF had more favourable outcomes in terms of stroke/TIAs, deaths, change in LVEF, and the maintenance of SR at the end of follow-up compared to MT. Besides, the TSA results supported this conclusion.
| S-EPMC8769301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeAtrial fibrillation is associated with an increased risk of cognitive impairment. It is unclear whether the restoration of sinus rhythm with catheter ablation may modify this risk. We conducted a systematic review of studies comparing cognitive outcomes following catheter ablation with medical therapy (rate and/or rhythm control) in atrial fibrillation.MethodsSearches were performed on the following databases from their inception to 17 October 2021: PubMed, OVID Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library. The inclusion criteria comprised studies comparing catheter ablation against medical therapy (rate and/or rhythm control in conjunction with anticoagulation where appropriate) which included cognitive assessment and/or a diagnosis of dementia as an outcome.ResultsA total of 599 records were screened. Ten studies including 15,886 patients treated with catheter ablation and 42,684 patients treated with medical therapy were included. Studies which compared the impact of catheter ablation versus medical therapy on quantitative assessments of cognitive function yielded conflicting results. In studies, examining new onset dementia during follow-up, catheter ablation was associated with a lower risk of subsequent dementia diagnosis compared to medical therapy (hazard ratio: 0.60 (95% confidence interval 0.42-0.88, p < 0.05)).ConclusionThe accumulating evidence linking atrial fibrillation with cognitive impairment warrants the design of atrial fibrillation treatment strategies aimed at minimising cognitive decline. However, the impact of catheter ablation and atrial fibrillation medical therapy on cognitive decline is currently uncertain. Future studies investigating atrial fibrillation treatment strategies should include cognitive outcomes as important clinical endpoints.
| S-EPMC9550702 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia. Hybrid convergent ablation (HCA) is an emerging procedure for treating longstanding AF with promising results. HCA consists of a subxiphoid, surgical ablation followed by completion endocardial ablation. This meta-analysis of randomized control trials (RCT’s) and propensity score-matched studies aims to examine the efficacy and safety of HCA compared to endocardial catheter ablation (ECA) alone on patients with AF. Methods This review was written in accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses recommendations and guidance. The primary outcome for the analysis was freedom from AF (FFAF) at final follow up. Secondary outcomes were mortality and significant complications such as tamponade, sternotomy, esophageal injury, atrio-esophageal fistulae post procedurally. Results Four studies where included, with a total of 233 patients undergoing HCA and 189 patients undergoing ECA only. Pooled analysis demonstrated that HCA cohorts had significantly higher rates of FFAF than ECA cohorts, with an OR of 2.78 (95% CI 1.82–4.24, P < 0.01, I2 = 0). Major post-operative complications were observed in significantly more patients in the HCA group, with an OR of 5.14 (95% CI 1.70–15.54, P < 0.01). There was only one death reported in the HCA cohorts, with no deaths in the ECA cohort. Conclusion HCA is associated with a significantly higher FFAF than ECA, however, it is associated with increased post-procedural complications. There was only one death in the HCA cohort. Large RCT’s comparing the HCA and ECA techniques may further validate these results. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13019-022-01930-7.
| S-EPMC9375401 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To investigate the effect of ablation compared to medical therapy on clinical outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched using ablation, medical treatment, AF, and related words. The effect of ablation and medical therapy was sought to be gathered on stroke or transitional ischemic attack, mortality, hospitalization, recurrence of AF, progression of AF, and left ventricular ejection fraction. Analyses were performed using R software. 31 studies (the results of 27 randomized controlled trials), compromising an overall 6965 patients (Ablation, n = 3643; Medical treatment, n = 3322) were reviewed in our study, revealed that catheter ablation would result in substantial benefits for patients with AF without significant difference in serious adverse events compared to medical management (Risk Ratio: 0.92, [95% Confidence Interval (CI), 0.64-1.33]). Catheter ablation in patients with AF significantly resulted in a 29% reduction in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.71, [95% CI, 0.57-0.88]), a 57% reduction in hospitalization (RR: 0.43, [95% CI, 0.27-0.67]), a 53% reduction in AF recurrence (RR: 0.47, [95% CI, 0.36-0.61]), and a dramatic reduction, 89%, in progression of paroxysmal to persistent AF (RR: 0.11, [95% CI, 0.02-0.65]); also associated with a remarkable improvement in their left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (Mean Difference, MD: 6.84%, [95% CI, 3.27-10.42]) compared to medical therapy. Our study showed that ablation may be superior to medical therapy in patients with AF regarding AF recurrence, mortality, LVEF improvement, hospitalization, and AF progression outcomes.
| S-EPMC10826237 | biostudies-literature