article · European Heart Journal
Abstract Introduction Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Catheter ablation (CA) is supposed to improve outcomes in these patients. We aimed to update the evidence regarding CA in AF patients irrespective of their baseline heart failure. Methods We searched PubMed, Scopus, WOS, and Cochrane until February 2024 for relevant studies assessing the impact of CA compared to medical regimens in AF patients with and without heart failure. Outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, hospitalization for HF, hospitalization for other cardiovascular causes, and stroke. Results 13 studies were included with a total of 18370 patients. In HF patients, irrespective to their ejection fraction, CA was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.40, 95%CI [0.37 to 0.44], cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.36, 95%CI [0.32 to 0.42]), hospitalization from HF (RR 0.65, 95%CI [0.51 to 0.82]), hospitalization from other cardiovascular causes (RR 0.71, 95%CI [0.57 to 0.89]), and the incidence of stroke (RR 0.55, 95%CI [0.50 to 0.62]). Also, six studies with a total of 2015 patients compared CA to medical treatment in AF patients with HFrEF and HFpEF. CA showed a significant reduction in all-cause mortality in HFpEF patients compared to HFrEF (RR 0.46, 95%CI [0.25 to 0.85]) with no significant differences in terms of other studied outcomes. Moreover, six studies compared CA to medical treatment in HF vs no HF with a total of 2931 patients. Patients with AF and no HF had a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR .041, 95%CI [0.20 to 0.80]), with no significant differences in stroke or AF recurrence. Conclusion Current evidence supports the use of catheter ablation in atrial fibrillation patients, irrespective of their baseline heart failure, to achieve lower mortality and hospitalization rates.all-cause mortalitycardiovascular mortality
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.567
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.