International journal of cardiology · 2015
Radiofrequency catheter ablation maintains its efficacy better than antiarrhythmic medication in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: On-treatment analysis of the randomized controlled MANTRA-PAF trial.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Raatikainen M J Pekka, Hakalahti Antti, Uusimaa Paavo, Nielsen Jens Cosedis, Johannessen Arne, Hindricks Gerhard, Walfridsson Håkan, Pehrson Steen, Englund Anders, Hartikainen Juha, Kongstad Ole, Mortensen Leif Spange, Hansen Peter Steen, MANTRA-PAF investigators
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Medical ANtiarrhythmic Treatment or Radiofrequency Ablation in Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (MANTRA-PAF) is a randomized trial comparing radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFA) to antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) as first-line treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). In order to eliminate the clouding effect of crossover we performed an on-treatment analysis of the data.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n=294) were divided into three groups: those receiving only the assigned therapy (RFA and AAD groups) and those receiving both therapies (crossover group). The primary end points were AF burden in 7-day Holter recordings at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months and cumulative AF burden in all recordings. At 24 months, AF burden was significantly lower in the RFA (n=110) than in the AAD (n=92) and the crossover (n=84) groups (90th percentile 1% vs. 10% vs. 16%, P=0.007), and more patients were free from any AF (89% vs. 73% vs. 74%, P=0.006). In the RFA, AAD and the crossover groups 63%, 59% and 21% (P<0.001) of the patients had no AF episodes in any Holter recording, respectively. Quality of life improved significantly in all groups. There were no differences in serious adverse events between the RFA, AAD and crossover groups (19% vs. 8% vs. 23%) (P=0.10).
CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of antiarrhythmic therapy naïve patients with PAF long-term efficacy of RFA was superior to AAD therapy. Thus, it is reasonable to offer RFA as first-line treatment for highly symptomatic patients who accept the risks of the procedure and are aware of frequent need for reablation(s).
METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n=294) were divided into three groups: those receiving only the assigned therapy (RFA and AAD groups) and those receiving both therapies (crossover group). The primary end points were AF burden in 7-day Holter recordings at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months and cumulative AF burden in all recordings. At 24 months, AF burden was significantly lower in the RFA (n=110) than in the AAD (n=92) and the crossover (n=84) groups (90th percentile 1% vs. 10% vs. 16%, P=0.007), and more patients were free from any AF (89% vs. 73% vs. 74%, P=0.006). In the RFA, AAD and the crossover groups 63%, 59% and 21% (P<0.001) of the patients had no AF episodes in any Holter recording, respectively. Quality of life improved significantly in all groups. There were no differences in serious adverse events between the RFA, AAD and crossover groups (19% vs. 8% vs. 23%) (P=0.10).
CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of antiarrhythmic therapy naïve patients with PAF long-term efficacy of RFA was superior to AAD therapy. Thus, it is reasonable to offer RFA as first-line treatment for highly symptomatic patients who accept the risks of the procedure and are aware of frequent need for reablation(s).