Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation and impact on clinical outcomes.

Catheter ablation is the most effective rhythm-control option in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and is currently considered an option mainly for improving symptoms. We aimed to assess the impact of catheter ablation on hard clinical outcomes. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing catheter ablation vs. optimized medical treatment. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL on 8 January 2024, for trials published ≤10 years. We pooled data through risk ratio (RR) and mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence interval (CI), and calculated the number needed to treat (NNT). Sub-group and sensitivity analyses were performed for the presence/absence of heart failure (HF), paroxysmal/persistent AF, early ablation, higher/lower quality, and published ≤5 vs. >5 years. Twenty-two RCTs were identified, including 6400 patients followed for 6-52 months. All primary endpoints were significantly reduced by catheter ablation vs. medical management: all-cause hospitalization (RR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.39-0.85, Catheter ablation significantly reduced hospitalizations, AF burden, and relapse, and improved quality of life. An impact on hard clinical outcomes, with an important mortality reduction and improvement in LVEF, was seen for patients with AF and HF.

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest: Professor Rui Providencia has a Research Grant from Biosense-Webster for supporting a PhD Fellow on a project on AF mechanisms and genetics; Professor Riccardo Cappato reports grants from Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, Johnson and Johnson, grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Abbott and Biosense-Webster; No other conflicts of interest to report.