Cargando…
Risk Stratification for Atrial Fibrillation and Outcomes in Tachycardia-Bradycardia Syndrome: Ablation vs. Pacing
Background: Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation is an alternative treatment for patients with tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome (TBS) to avoid pacemaker implantation. The risk stratification for atrial fibrillation and outcomes between ablation and pacing has not been fully evaluated. Methods: T...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8217458/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34169100 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.674471 |
_version_ | 1783710593576861696 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Rongfeng Wang, Yue Yang, Minghui Yang, Yiheng Wang, Zhengyan Yin, Xiaomeng Dong, Yingxue Yu, Xiaohong Xiao, Xianjie Gao, Lianjun Xia, Yunlong |
author_facet | Zhang, Rongfeng Wang, Yue Yang, Minghui Yang, Yiheng Wang, Zhengyan Yin, Xiaomeng Dong, Yingxue Yu, Xiaohong Xiao, Xianjie Gao, Lianjun Xia, Yunlong |
author_sort | Zhang, Rongfeng |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation is an alternative treatment for patients with tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome (TBS) to avoid pacemaker implantation. The risk stratification for atrial fibrillation and outcomes between ablation and pacing has not been fully evaluated. Methods: This retrospective study involved 306 TBS patients, including 141 patients who received catheter ablation (Ablation group, age: 62.2 ± 9.0 months, mean longest pauses: 5.2 ± 2.2 s) and 165 patients who received pacemaker implement (Pacing group, age: 62.3 ± 9.1 months, mean longest pauses: 6.0 ± 2.3 s). The primary endpoint was a composite of call cause mortality, cardiovascular-related hospitalization or thrombosis events (stroke, or peripheral thrombosis). The second endpoint was progress of atrial fibrillation and heart failure. Results: After a median follow-up of 75.4 months, the primary endpoint occurred in significantly higher patients in the pacing group than in the ablation group (59.4 vs.15.6%, OR 6.05, 95% CI: 3.73–9.80, P < 0.001). None of deaths was occurred in ablation group, and 1 death occurred due to cancer. Cardiovascular-related hospitalization occurred in 50.9% of the pacing group compared with 14.2% in the ablation group (OR: 4.87, 95% CI: 2.99–7.95, P < 0.001). More thrombosis events occurred in the pacing group than in the ablation group (12.7 vs. 2.1%, OR 6.06, 95% CI: 1.81–20.35, P = 0.004). Significant more patients progressed to persistent atrial fibrillation in pacing group than in ablation group (23.6 vs. 2.1%, P < 0.001). The NYHA classification of the pacing group was significantly higher than that of the ablation group (2.11 ± 0.83 vs. 1.50 ± 0.74, P < 0.001). The proportion of antiarrhythmic drugs and anticoagulants used in the pacing group was significantly higher than that in the ablation group (41.2 vs. 7.1%, P < 0.001; 16.4 vs. 2.1%, P = 0.009). Conclusion: Catheter ablation for patients with TBS was associated with a significantly lower rate of a composite end point of cardiovascular related hospitalization and thromboembolic events. Furthermore, catheter ablation reduced the progression of atrial fibrillation and heart failure. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8217458 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82174582021-06-23 Risk Stratification for Atrial Fibrillation and Outcomes in Tachycardia-Bradycardia Syndrome: Ablation vs. Pacing Zhang, Rongfeng Wang, Yue Yang, Minghui Yang, Yiheng Wang, Zhengyan Yin, Xiaomeng Dong, Yingxue Yu, Xiaohong Xiao, Xianjie Gao, Lianjun Xia, Yunlong Front Cardiovasc Med Cardiovascular Medicine Background: Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation is an alternative treatment for patients with tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome (TBS) to avoid pacemaker implantation. The risk stratification for atrial fibrillation and outcomes between ablation and pacing has not been fully evaluated. Methods: This retrospective study involved 306 TBS patients, including 141 patients who received catheter ablation (Ablation group, age: 62.2 ± 9.0 months, mean longest pauses: 5.2 ± 2.2 s) and 165 patients who received pacemaker implement (Pacing group, age: 62.3 ± 9.1 months, mean longest pauses: 6.0 ± 2.3 s). The primary endpoint was a composite of call cause mortality, cardiovascular-related hospitalization or thrombosis events (stroke, or peripheral thrombosis). The second endpoint was progress of atrial fibrillation and heart failure. Results: After a median follow-up of 75.4 months, the primary endpoint occurred in significantly higher patients in the pacing group than in the ablation group (59.4 vs.15.6%, OR 6.05, 95% CI: 3.73–9.80, P < 0.001). None of deaths was occurred in ablation group, and 1 death occurred due to cancer. Cardiovascular-related hospitalization occurred in 50.9% of the pacing group compared with 14.2% in the ablation group (OR: 4.87, 95% CI: 2.99–7.95, P < 0.001). More thrombosis events occurred in the pacing group than in the ablation group (12.7 vs. 2.1%, OR 6.06, 95% CI: 1.81–20.35, P = 0.004). Significant more patients progressed to persistent atrial fibrillation in pacing group than in ablation group (23.6 vs. 2.1%, P < 0.001). The NYHA classification of the pacing group was significantly higher than that of the ablation group (2.11 ± 0.83 vs. 1.50 ± 0.74, P < 0.001). The proportion of antiarrhythmic drugs and anticoagulants used in the pacing group was significantly higher than that in the ablation group (41.2 vs. 7.1%, P < 0.001; 16.4 vs. 2.1%, P = 0.009). Conclusion: Catheter ablation for patients with TBS was associated with a significantly lower rate of a composite end point of cardiovascular related hospitalization and thromboembolic events. Furthermore, catheter ablation reduced the progression of atrial fibrillation and heart failure. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8217458/ /pubmed/34169100 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.674471 Text en Copyright © 2021 Zhang, Wang, Yang, Yang, Wang, Yin, Dong, Yu, Xiao, Gao and Xia. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Cardiovascular Medicine Zhang, Rongfeng Wang, Yue Yang, Minghui Yang, Yiheng Wang, Zhengyan Yin, Xiaomeng Dong, Yingxue Yu, Xiaohong Xiao, Xianjie Gao, Lianjun Xia, Yunlong Risk Stratification for Atrial Fibrillation and Outcomes in Tachycardia-Bradycardia Syndrome: Ablation vs. Pacing |
title | Risk Stratification for Atrial Fibrillation and Outcomes in Tachycardia-Bradycardia Syndrome: Ablation vs. Pacing |
title_full | Risk Stratification for Atrial Fibrillation and Outcomes in Tachycardia-Bradycardia Syndrome: Ablation vs. Pacing |
title_fullStr | Risk Stratification for Atrial Fibrillation and Outcomes in Tachycardia-Bradycardia Syndrome: Ablation vs. Pacing |
title_full_unstemmed | Risk Stratification for Atrial Fibrillation and Outcomes in Tachycardia-Bradycardia Syndrome: Ablation vs. Pacing |
title_short | Risk Stratification for Atrial Fibrillation and Outcomes in Tachycardia-Bradycardia Syndrome: Ablation vs. Pacing |
title_sort | risk stratification for atrial fibrillation and outcomes in tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome: ablation vs. pacing |
topic | Cardiovascular Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8217458/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34169100 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.674471 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangrongfeng riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT wangyue riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT yangminghui riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT yangyiheng riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT wangzhengyan riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT yinxiaomeng riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT dongyingxue riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT yuxiaohong riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT xiaoxianjie riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT gaolianjun riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing AT xiayunlong riskstratificationforatrialfibrillationandoutcomesintachycardiabradycardiasyndromeablationvspacing |