Indian heart journal · 2020
Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Waranugraha Yoga, Rizal Ardian, Setiawan Dion, Aziz Indra Jabbar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) has a complex pathophysiological process. The standard catheter ablation approach is pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). The additional value of complex fractionated electrogram (CFAE) ablation is still unclear. We aimed to investigate the additional value of CFAE ablation for non-paroxysmal AF.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies up to May 2020. Articles comparing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus CFAE ablation and PVI alone for AF were obtained from the electronic scientific databases. The pooled mean difference (MD) and pooled risk ratio (RR) were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 1034 patients were involved. Following a single catheter ablation procedure, the presence of any atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA) with or without the use of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) between both groups were not significantly different (RR = 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.97-1.24; p = 0.13). Similar results were also obtained for the presence of any ATA without the use of AADs (RR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.96-1.22; p = 0.2). The additional CFAE ablation took longer procedure times (MD = 46.95 min; 95% CI = 38.27-55.63; p = < 0.01) and fluoroscopy times (MD = 11.69 min; 95% CI = 8.54-14.83; p = < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Additional CFAE ablation failed to improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal AF patients. It also requires a longer duration of procedure times and fluoroscopy times.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies up to May 2020. Articles comparing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus CFAE ablation and PVI alone for AF were obtained from the electronic scientific databases. The pooled mean difference (MD) and pooled risk ratio (RR) were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 1034 patients were involved. Following a single catheter ablation procedure, the presence of any atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA) with or without the use of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) between both groups were not significantly different (RR = 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.97-1.24; p = 0.13). Similar results were also obtained for the presence of any ATA without the use of AADs (RR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.96-1.22; p = 0.2). The additional CFAE ablation took longer procedure times (MD = 46.95 min; 95% CI = 38.27-55.63; p = < 0.01) and fluoroscopy times (MD = 11.69 min; 95% CI = 8.54-14.83; p = < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Additional CFAE ablation failed to improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal AF patients. It also requires a longer duration of procedure times and fluoroscopy times.