Cargando…
Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia. Catheter ablation (CA) of AF is an increasingly offered therapeutic approach, primary to relieve AF-related symptoms. Despite the development of new ablation approaches, there is no consensus regarding the most efficient...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7684831/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33234655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041819 |
_version_ | 1783613076517421056 |
---|---|
author | Charitakis, Emmanouil Karlsson, Lars O Rizas, Kostantinos Almroth, Henrik Hassel Jönsson, Anders Schweiler, Jonas Sideris, Skevos Tsartsalis, Dimitrios Dragioti, Elena Chaimani, Anna |
author_facet | Charitakis, Emmanouil Karlsson, Lars O Rizas, Kostantinos Almroth, Henrik Hassel Jönsson, Anders Schweiler, Jonas Sideris, Skevos Tsartsalis, Dimitrios Dragioti, Elena Chaimani, Anna |
author_sort | Charitakis, Emmanouil |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia. Catheter ablation (CA) of AF is an increasingly offered therapeutic approach, primary to relieve AF-related symptoms. Despite the development of new ablation approaches, there is no consensus regarding the most efficient ablation strategy. The objective of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare the efficacy and safety of all different CA approaches for the treatment of patients with paroxysmal (PAF) and non-PAF (non-PAF). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will perform a systematic search to identify randomised controlled trials of different CA approaches for the treatment of PAF and non-PAF, through the final search date of 1 March 2020. Information sources will include major bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL) and clinical trial registries. Our primary outcomes will be the efficacy (recurrence-free survival) and safety of different CA approaches for the treatment of AF. Secondary outcomes will be all-cause mortality and procedural time. An NMA will be performed to determine the relative effects of different catheter ablation approaches (such as pulmonary vein isolation alone or in combination with ablation lines, ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms, etc). In PAF, a separate analysis will be performed including different energy sources (such as radiofrequency, cryogenic and laser energy). Risk of bias assessment and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings to potential bias. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval will be needed because data are collected from previous studies. The results will be presented through peer-review journals and conference presentation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020169494. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7684831 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76848312020-11-30 Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Charitakis, Emmanouil Karlsson, Lars O Rizas, Kostantinos Almroth, Henrik Hassel Jönsson, Anders Schweiler, Jonas Sideris, Skevos Tsartsalis, Dimitrios Dragioti, Elena Chaimani, Anna BMJ Open Cardiovascular Medicine INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia. Catheter ablation (CA) of AF is an increasingly offered therapeutic approach, primary to relieve AF-related symptoms. Despite the development of new ablation approaches, there is no consensus regarding the most efficient ablation strategy. The objective of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare the efficacy and safety of all different CA approaches for the treatment of patients with paroxysmal (PAF) and non-PAF (non-PAF). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will perform a systematic search to identify randomised controlled trials of different CA approaches for the treatment of PAF and non-PAF, through the final search date of 1 March 2020. Information sources will include major bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL) and clinical trial registries. Our primary outcomes will be the efficacy (recurrence-free survival) and safety of different CA approaches for the treatment of AF. Secondary outcomes will be all-cause mortality and procedural time. An NMA will be performed to determine the relative effects of different catheter ablation approaches (such as pulmonary vein isolation alone or in combination with ablation lines, ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms, etc). In PAF, a separate analysis will be performed including different energy sources (such as radiofrequency, cryogenic and laser energy). Risk of bias assessment and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings to potential bias. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval will be needed because data are collected from previous studies. The results will be presented through peer-review journals and conference presentation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020169494. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-11-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7684831/ /pubmed/33234655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041819 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Cardiovascular Medicine Charitakis, Emmanouil Karlsson, Lars O Rizas, Kostantinos Almroth, Henrik Hassel Jönsson, Anders Schweiler, Jonas Sideris, Skevos Tsartsalis, Dimitrios Dragioti, Elena Chaimani, Anna Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title | Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full | Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_short | Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_sort | comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
topic | Cardiovascular Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7684831/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33234655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041819 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT charitakisemmanouil comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT karlssonlarso comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT rizaskostantinos comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT almrothhenrik comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT hasseljonssonanders comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT schweilerjonas comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT siderisskevos comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT tsartsalisdimitrios comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT dragiotielena comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT chaimanianna comparingefficacyandsafetyincatheterablationstrategiesforatrialfibrillationprotocolofanetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials |