TY - JOUR
T1 - Catheter ablation versus conventional treatment of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction
T2 - a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
AU - Briceño, David F.
AU - Markman, Timothy M.
AU - Lupercio, Florentino
AU - Romero, Jorge
AU - Liang, Jackson J.
AU - Villablanca, Pedro A.
AU - Birati, Edo Y.
AU - Garcia, Fermin C.
AU - Di Biase, Luigi
AU - Natale, Andrea
AU - Marchlinski, Francis E.
AU - Santangeli, Pasquale
N1 - Funding Information:
Conflict of interest Dr. Di Biase is a consultant for Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and St. Jude Medical and has received speaker honoraria/travel from Medtronic, Atricure, EPiEP, and Biotronik. Dr. Natale is a consultant for Biosense Webster, Stereotaxis, and St Jude Medical. Natale received speaker honoraria/travel from Medtronic, Atricure, EPiEP Biotronik, and Janssen. Dr. Marchlinski is a consultant for Abbot/St Jude Medical; Biotronik; Biosense Webster, Inc.; Infobionics; Medtronic, Inc.; and Boston Scientific Corp. and receives research grant from Biosense Webster, Inc. and fellowship support from Abbot/St Jude Medical; Biotronik; Biosense Webster, Inc.; Medtronic, Inc.; and Boston Scientific Corp. The remaining authors have no disclosures.
Funding Information:
Dr. Di Biase is a consultant for Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and St. Jude Medical and has received speaker honoraria/travel from Medtronic, Atricure, EPiEP, and Biotronik. Dr. Natale is a consultant for Biosense Webster, Stereotaxis, and St Jude Medical. Natale received speaker honoraria/travel from Medtronic, Atricure, EPiEP Biotronik, and Janssen. Dr. Marchlinski is a consultant for Abbot/St Jude Medical; Biotronik; Biosense Webster, Inc.; Infobionics; Medtronic, Inc.; and Boston Scientific Corp. and receives research grant from Biosense Webster, Inc. and fellowship support from Abbot/St Jude Medical; Biotronik; Biosense Webster, Inc.; Medtronic, Inc.; and Boston Scientific Corp. The remaining authors have no disclosures.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2018/10/1
Y1 - 2018/10/1
N2 - Purpose: To evaluate whether catheter ablation is superior to conventional therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods: Electronic databases were searched for randomized, controlled trials of AF ablation compared with conventional therapy in adults with AF and HFrEF. Odds ratio (OR), standard mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were measured using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Results: There were seven trials including 856 patients (mean age 62 years, male 86%). All-cause mortality in patients who underwent ablation was 10% vs. 19% in those who received conventional treatment (four trials, 668 patients, 47% relative reduction, 9% absolute reduction; OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29–0.72). Improvement in the left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly higher for patients undergoing ablation (+ 9 ± 10%) compared to conventional treatment (+ 2 ± 7%) (seven trials, 856 patients, SMD 0.68, 95% CI 0.28–1.08). Freedom from AF was higher in patients undergoing ablation (seven trials, 856 patients, 70% vs. 18%, respectively; 64% relative reduction, 52% absolute reduction; OR 0.03 95% CI 0.01–0.11). There was no significant difference in major complications between both strategies (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.58–2.20). Conclusions: Catheter ablation for AF in patients with HFrEF decreases mortality and AF recurrence and improves left ventricular function, functional capacity, and quality of life, when compared to conventional management, without increasing complications.
AB - Purpose: To evaluate whether catheter ablation is superior to conventional therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods: Electronic databases were searched for randomized, controlled trials of AF ablation compared with conventional therapy in adults with AF and HFrEF. Odds ratio (OR), standard mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were measured using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Results: There were seven trials including 856 patients (mean age 62 years, male 86%). All-cause mortality in patients who underwent ablation was 10% vs. 19% in those who received conventional treatment (four trials, 668 patients, 47% relative reduction, 9% absolute reduction; OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29–0.72). Improvement in the left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly higher for patients undergoing ablation (+ 9 ± 10%) compared to conventional treatment (+ 2 ± 7%) (seven trials, 856 patients, SMD 0.68, 95% CI 0.28–1.08). Freedom from AF was higher in patients undergoing ablation (seven trials, 856 patients, 70% vs. 18%, respectively; 64% relative reduction, 52% absolute reduction; OR 0.03 95% CI 0.01–0.11). There was no significant difference in major complications between both strategies (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.58–2.20). Conclusions: Catheter ablation for AF in patients with HFrEF decreases mortality and AF recurrence and improves left ventricular function, functional capacity, and quality of life, when compared to conventional management, without increasing complications.
KW - Atrial fibrillation
KW - Catheter ablation
KW - Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction
KW - Meta-analysis
KW - Randomized controlled trial
KW - Systolic heart failure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051421417&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051421417&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10840-018-0425-0
DO - 10.1007/s10840-018-0425-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 30066291
AN - SCOPUS:85051421417
SN - 1383-875X
VL - 53
SP - 19
EP - 29
JO - Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
JF - Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
IS - 1
ER -