Effectiveness of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation according to heart failure etiology

Background Catheter ablation is an important rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with concomitant heart failure (HF). The objective of this study was to assess the comparative efficacy of AF ablation patients with ischemic vs nonischemic heart failure. Methods We conduct...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of arrhythmia Vol. 36; no. 1; pp. 84 - 92
Main Authors Black‐Maier, Eric, Steinberg, Benjamin A., Trulock, Kevin M., Wang, Frances, Lokhnygina, Yuliya, O'Neal, Wanda, Al‐Khatib, Sana, Atwater, Brett D., Daubert, James P., Frazier‐Mills, Camille, Hegland, Donald D., Jackson, Kevin P., Jackson, Larry R., Koontz, Jason I., Lewis, Robert K., Sun, Albert Y., Thomas, Kevin L., Bahnson, Tristram D., Piccini, Jonathan P.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Japan John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.02.2020
John Wiley and Sons Inc
Wiley
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Background Catheter ablation is an important rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with concomitant heart failure (HF). The objective of this study was to assess the comparative efficacy of AF ablation patients with ischemic vs nonischemic heart failure. Methods We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of patients with HF who underwent AF ablation. Outcomes were compared based on HF etiology and included in‐hospital events, symptoms (Mayo AF Symptom Inventory [MAFSI]), and functional status (New York Heart Association class) and freedom from atrial arrhythmias at 12 months. Results Among 242 patients (n = 70 [29%] ischemic, n = 172 [71%] nonischemic), patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy were younger (mean age 64 ± 11.5 vs 69 ± 9.1, P = .002), more often female (36% vs 17%, P = .004), and had higher mean left‐ventricular ejection fraction (47% vs 42%, P = .0007). There were no significant differences in periprocedural characteristics, including mean procedure time (243 ± 74.2 vs 259 ± 81.8 minutes, P = .1) and nonleft atrial ablation (17% vs 20%, P = .6). All‐cause adverse events were similar in each group (15% vs 17%, P = .7). NYHA and MAFSI scores improved significantly at follow‐up and did not differ according to HF etiology (P = .5; P = .10‐1.00 after Bonferroni correction). There were no significant differences in freedom from recurrent atrial arrhythmia at 12‐months between ischemic (74%) and nonischemic patients (78%): adjusted RR 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.33‐1.19. Conclusions Catheter ablation in patients with AF and concomitant heart failure leads to significant improvements in functional and symptom status without significant differences between patients with ischemic vs nonischemic HF etiology. Catheter ablation is an important rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with concomitant heart failure (HF). The objective of this study was to assess the comparative efficacy of AF ablation patients with ischemic versus nonischemic heart failure. We found that catheter ablation in patients with AF and concomitant heart failure leads to significant improvements in functional and symptom status without significant differences between patients with ischemic versus nonischemic HF etiology.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1880-4276
1883-2148
DOI:10.1002/joa3.12291