Hybrid ablation versus transcatheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Despite the successful creation of complex lesion sets during hybrid ablation (HA), reoccurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF), and/or atrial arrhythmia and procedural complications still occur. The main objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety between HA and transcatheter ablation (TA).

Methods

We searched Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database up to October 2017. Studies that satisfied our predefined inclusion criteria were included. Of the 894 records, 4 studies encompassing 331 patients were included in our study. We assessed pooled data using random-effect or fixed-effect model. The main endpoint was freedom of atrial arrhythmia after follow-up duration, secondary results were procedure time and intraoperative and postoperative adverse events. Similarly, tertiary outcomes were endocardial time, fluoroscopy time, and postoperative hospitalization.

Results

Compared with TA, HA treatment through mini-thoracotomy access improved superiority in freedom of atrial arrhythmia after follow-up duration (odds ratio [OR]?=?6.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.63-16.90), but HA increased the incidence of intraoperative and postoperative adverse events for AF patients (OR?=?2.98, 95% CI: 1.30-6.83). HA through either mini-thoracotomy or transdiaphragmatic/subxiphoid access had longer procedure time and postoperative hospitalization than TA. However, endocardial time was shorter than TA.

Conclusions

For AF patients, HA possessed of an overall superior outcome using mini-thoracotomy way to TA. Although HA had longer procedure time, it yielded a reduction in endocardial time. Meanwhile, we should pay attention to the significantly high risk of intraoperative and postoperative adverse events that the HA generated.

SUBMITTER: Zhang J 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6370058 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature