Cargando…

Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) has a complex pathophysiological process. The standard catheter ablation approach is pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). The additional value of complex fractionated electrogram (CFAE) ablation is still unclear. We aimed to investigate the additional v...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Waranugraha, Yoga, Rizal, Ardian, Setiawan, Dion, Aziz, Indra Jabbar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7961253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33714411
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2020.11.004
_version_ 1783665219210313728
author Waranugraha, Yoga
Rizal, Ardian
Setiawan, Dion
Aziz, Indra Jabbar
author_facet Waranugraha, Yoga
Rizal, Ardian
Setiawan, Dion
Aziz, Indra Jabbar
author_sort Waranugraha, Yoga
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) has a complex pathophysiological process. The standard catheter ablation approach is pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). The additional value of complex fractionated electrogram (CFAE) ablation is still unclear. We aimed to investigate the additional value of CFAE ablation for non-paroxysmal AF. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies up to May 2020. Articles comparing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus CFAE ablation and PVI alone for AF were obtained from the electronic scientific databases. The pooled mean difference (MD) and pooled risk ratio (RR) were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 1034 patients were involved. Following a single catheter ablation procedure, the presence of any atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA) with or without the use of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) between both groups were not significantly different (RR = 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.97–1.24; p = 0.13). Similar results were also obtained for the presence of any ATA without the use of AADs (RR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.96–1.22; p = 0.2). The additional CFAE ablation took longer procedure times (MD = 46.95 min; 95% CI = 38.27–55.63; p = < 0.01) and fluoroscopy times (MD = 11.69 min; 95% CI = 8.54–14.83; p = < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Additional CFAE ablation failed to improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal AF patients. It also requires a longer duration of procedure times and fluoroscopy times.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7961253
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79612532021-03-19 Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Waranugraha, Yoga Rizal, Ardian Setiawan, Dion Aziz, Indra Jabbar Indian Heart J Original Article BACKGROUND: Non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) has a complex pathophysiological process. The standard catheter ablation approach is pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). The additional value of complex fractionated electrogram (CFAE) ablation is still unclear. We aimed to investigate the additional value of CFAE ablation for non-paroxysmal AF. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies up to May 2020. Articles comparing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus CFAE ablation and PVI alone for AF were obtained from the electronic scientific databases. The pooled mean difference (MD) and pooled risk ratio (RR) were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 1034 patients were involved. Following a single catheter ablation procedure, the presence of any atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA) with or without the use of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) between both groups were not significantly different (RR = 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.97–1.24; p = 0.13). Similar results were also obtained for the presence of any ATA without the use of AADs (RR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.96–1.22; p = 0.2). The additional CFAE ablation took longer procedure times (MD = 46.95 min; 95% CI = 38.27–55.63; p = < 0.01) and fluoroscopy times (MD = 11.69 min; 95% CI = 8.54–14.83; p = < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Additional CFAE ablation failed to improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal AF patients. It also requires a longer duration of procedure times and fluoroscopy times. Elsevier 2021 2020-11-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7961253/ /pubmed/33714411 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2020.11.004 Text en © 2020 Cardiological Society of India. Published by Elsevier B.V. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Waranugraha, Yoga
Rizal, Ardian
Setiawan, Dion
Aziz, Indra Jabbar
Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_short Additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_sort additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation does not improve the outcomes of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7961253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33714411
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2020.11.004
work_keys_str_mv AT waranugrahayoga additionalcomplexfractionatedatrialelectrogramablationdoesnotimprovetheoutcomesofnonparoxysmalatrialfibrillationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT rizalardian additionalcomplexfractionatedatrialelectrogramablationdoesnotimprovetheoutcomesofnonparoxysmalatrialfibrillationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT setiawandion additionalcomplexfractionatedatrialelectrogramablationdoesnotimprovetheoutcomesofnonparoxysmalatrialfibrillationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT azizindrajabbar additionalcomplexfractionatedatrialelectrogramablationdoesnotimprovetheoutcomesofnonparoxysmalatrialfibrillationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials