Dataset Information

Catheter ablation and cognitive function in atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a risk factor for cognitive dysfunction. Although catheter ablation (CA) is one of the main treatments for AF, whether it can improve cognitive function in patients with AF remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the cognitive outcome post-CA procedure.

Methods

Two investigators independently searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang, and VIP databases from inception to September 2021 for all the potentially eligible studies. The outcomes of interest included dementia or cognitive disorder through scoring or recognized classification criteria. Heterogeneity was determined by using Cochrane's Q test and calculating the I ². A random-effects model was used to incorporate the potential effects of heterogeneity. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the methodological quality of each included study, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method was adopted to evaluate the quality of evidence.

Result

Thirteen studies including 40,868 patients were included, among which 12,086 patients received AF ablation. Meta-analysis indicated that patients with AF ablation had a lower risk of dementia incidence in comparison to patients with AF without ablation [hazard ratio (HR): 0.60, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.84, p = 0.003 I ² = 40%]. Significant differences were observed in the incidence of new-onset dementia [risk ratio (RR): 0.43, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.65, p < 0.0001 I ² = 84%]; the changes in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score [weighted mean difference (WMD): 1.00, 95% CI: 0.36 to 1.64, p < 0.005 I ² = 0%] and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score (WMD: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.26, p < 0.00001 I ² = 0%]. However, in subgroup analysis, we did not observe significant changes in MoCA score at < 3 months (WMD: 1.20, 95% CI: -0.19 to 2.58, p = 0.09 I ² = 50%) and changes in cognitive function scores between the radiofrequency group and cryoballoon group [standard mean difference (SMD): 0.39, 95% CI: -0.47 to 1.24, p = 0.38 I ² = 87%]. The NOS indicated that included studies were moderate to high quality, while the quality of evidence assessed by GRADE was low in 2 and very low in 2.

Conclusion

We analyzed the related cognitive outcomes after AF ablation. In the overall population, AF ablation had a positive trend for improving cognitive function at >3 months post-procedure. However, AF ablation might not be related to the improvement of cognitive function at < 3 months.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42021285198.

SUBMITTER: Chen P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9492882 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Catheter ablation and cognitive function in atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chen Pengfei P Chen Zhuhong Z Pan Deng D Miao Lina L Shi Yujiao Y Guo Ming M Du Jianpeng J

Frontiers in neurology 20220908

<h4>Background</h4>Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a risk factor for cognitive dysfunction. Although catheter ablation (CA) is one of the main treatments for AF, whether it can improve cognitive function in patients with AF remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the cognitive outcome post-CA procedure.<h4>Methods</h4>Two investigators independently searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang, and VIP databases from inception to September 2021 f ...[more]

PMID: 36158973

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCatheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequently performed cardiac ablation procedure worldwide. The majority of ablations can now be performed safely with minimal radiation exposure or even without the use of fluoroscopy, thanks to advances in 3-dimensional electroanatomical mapping systems and/or intracardiac echocardiography. The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of zero fluoroscopy (ZF) versus non-zero fluoroscopy (NZF) strategies for AF ablation procedures.MethodsElectronic databases were searched and systematically reviewed for studies comparing procedural parameters and outcomes of ZF vs. NZF approaches in patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF. We used a random-effects model to derive the mean difference (MD) and risk ratios (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsOur meta-analysis included seven studies comprising 1,593 patients. The ZF approach was found to be feasible in 95.1% of patients. Compared to the NZF approach, the ZF approach significantly reduced procedure time [mean difference (MD): -9.11 min (95% CI: -12.93 to -5.30 min; p < 0.01)], fluoroscopy time [MD: -5.21 min (95% CI: -5.51 to -4.91 min; p < 0.01)], and fluoroscopy dose [MD: -3.96 mGy (95% CI: -4.27 to -3.64; p < 0.01)]. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of total ablation time [MD: -104.26 s (95% CI: -183.37 to -25.14; p = 0.12)]. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the acute [risk ratio (RR): 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00-1.02; p = 0.72] and long-term success rates (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.90-1.03; p = 0.56) between the ZF and NZF methods. The complication rate was 2.76% in the entire study population and did not differ between the groups (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.41-2.15; p = 0.89).ConclusionThe ZF approach is a feasible method for AF ablation procedures. It significantly reduces procedure time and radiation exposure without compromising the acute and long-term success rates or complication rates.

Project description:PurposeThere is increasing evidence that left atrial appendage flow velocity (LAAFV) is linked to the recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation (CA), suggesting the potential predictable significance of LAAFV in this setting. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether LAAFV is association with AF recurrence after CA.MethodsUp to May 1, 2022, six databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and CINAHL) were searched for literature reporting the association between LAAFV and AF recurrence after CA. All statistical analyses were carried out using STATA version 16 software. Heterogeneity was determined by the Cochrane's Q test and I2 statistics. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the methodological quality of each included study, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method was adopted to evaluate the quality of evidence.ResultSixteen studies with 5,006 AF patients after CA (1,479 patients with AF recurrence, 3,527 without AF recurrence) were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis of 15 studies (16 data sets) showed that patients with recurrence exhibited lower LAAFV values than those without recurrence [standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.65, 95% CI: -0.88 to -0.42, P < 0.01]. Moreover, we evaluated the association of LAAFV and the risk of AF recurrence after CA. Nine studies (11 data sets) defined LAAFV as continuous variables, and the pooled analysis suggested that for every 1 cm/s rise in LAAFV values, the risk of AF recurrence after CA decreased by 3% [Odds Ratio (OR): 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95 to 0.99, P < 0.01]. Seven studies defined LAAFV as categorical variables, and the pooled analysis showed that lower LAAFV were associated with an increased risk of AF recurrence after CA [OR: 2.28, 95% CI: 1.46 to 3.57, P < 0.01]. The subgroup analyses showed that the association between LAAFV and AF recurrence after CA was not significantly affected by the AF type and ablation procedure. The NOS indicated that included studies were moderate to high quality, while the GRADE assessment suggested a low certainty of the evidence.ConclusionLower LAAFV may be associated with an increased risk of AF recurrence after CA. Further studies with well designed and randomized studies for LAAFV should be conducted.Systematic review registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier [CRD42022333627].

Project description:BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Current international guidelines recommend antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation (CA) as rhythm-control strategies for AF. This study aimed to comprehensively assess economic evaluations (EEs) of the treatment of AF by country income level.MethodsSeven electronic databases were systematically searched for EE literature until March 30, 2024, with no constraints on time or language. Two independent reviewers selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the quality of the data. Full EEs comparing CA with antiarrhythmic drugs for rhythm-control treatment were included; surgical or rate-control treatments were excluded. The quality of the included articles was assessed using the ECOBIAS checklist. Costs were converted to purchasing power parity US dollars for 2023. A random-effects meta-analysis was applied to pool incremental net benefit (INB) based on a heterogeneity test and its degree (I2 > 25% or Cochran's Q test < 0.1). We also explored heterogeneity and potential publication bias and conducted sensitivity and subgroup analyses.ResultsIn total, 27 studies across nine countries were eligible, predominantly from high-income countries (n = 25), with a smaller subset from upper-middle-income countries (n = 2). Because of the heterogeneity among the studies, a random-effects model was selected over a fixed-effects model to pool INBs. Most studies (n = 21) favored CA as the cost-effective intervention, yielding an INB of $US23,796 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15,341-32,251) in high-income countries. However, heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 99.67%). In upper-middle-income countries, the estimated INB was $US18,330 (95% CI - 11,900-48,526). The publication bias results showed no evidence of asymmetrical funnel plots.ConclusionIn this meta-analysis, CA emerged as a cost-effective rhythm-control treatment for AF when compared with antiarrhythmic drugs, particularly in high-income countries. However, economic evidence for upper-middle-income countries is lacking, and no primary evaluations were found for low-middle-income and low-income countries. Further EEs are necessary to expand the understanding of AF treatment globally.

Dataset Information

Catheter ablation and cognitive function in atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Result

Conclusion

Systematic review registration

Publications

Catheter ablation and cognitive function in atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets