B Zhang1, D Shen1, S Feng2, Y Zhen1, G Zhang3. 1. Department of Cardiology, People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, 8 Dianli Road, 212002, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China. 2. Department of Nephrology, People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China. 3. Department of Cardiology, People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, 8 Dianli Road, 212002, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China. guohuizhang2013@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is unclear what constitutes the optimal strategy for management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with systolic left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. We hypothesized that catheter ablation of AF had benefits compared with rate control in patients with systolic LV dysfunction. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized, observational studies. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to compare the improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), functional capacity, and quality of life between a catheter ablation group and a rate control group. RESULTS: Six trials with 324 patients were included in the analysis. Patients in the catheter ablation group had greater improvement of LVEF (WMD: 8.89; 95 % CI: 6.93-10.86; p < 0.001), 6-min walk distance (WMD: 46.9; 95 % CI: 28.5-65.4; p < 0.001), and lower Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) scores (WMD: - 19.6; 95 % CI: - 23.6-- 15.7; p < 0.001) compared with patients in the rate control group. Overall, there were only ten procedure-related events and the procedure-related events rate was 4.9 % per procedure and 5.6 % per patient. CONCLUSION: The present analysis suggests that catheter ablation of AF has benefits in terms of an improvement in LVEF, in functional capacity, and in quality of life compared with rate control in patients with systolic LV dysfunction, and the risk of complications related to procedures is acceptable.
PURPOSE: It is unclear what constitutes the optimal strategy for management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with systolic left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. We hypothesized that catheter ablation of AF had benefits compared with rate control in patients with systolic LV dysfunction. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized, observational studies. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to compare the improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), functional capacity, and quality of life between a catheter ablation group and a rate control group. RESULTS: Six trials with 324 patients were included in the analysis. Patients in the catheter ablation group had greater improvement of LVEF (WMD: 8.89; 95 % CI: 6.93-10.86; p < 0.001), 6-min walk distance (WMD: 46.9; 95 % CI: 28.5-65.4; p < 0.001), and lower Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) scores (WMD: - 19.6; 95 % CI: - 23.6-- 15.7; p < 0.001) compared with patients in the rate control group. Overall, there were only ten procedure-related events and the procedure-related events rate was 4.9 % per procedure and 5.6 % per patient. CONCLUSION: The present analysis suggests that catheter ablation of AF has benefits in terms of an improvement in LVEF, in functional capacity, and in quality of life compared with rate control in patients with systolic LV dysfunction, and the risk of complications related to procedures is acceptable.
Authors: Craig T January; L Samuel Wann; Joseph S Alpert; Hugh Calkins; Joaquin E Cigarroa; Joseph C Cleveland; Jamie B Conti; Patrick T Ellinor; Michael D Ezekowitz; Michael E Field; Katherine T Murray; Ralph L Sacco; William G Stevenson; Patrick J Tchou; Cynthia M Tracy; Clyde W Yancy Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Yong-Mei Cha; Anita Wokhlu; Samuel J Asirvatham; Win-Kuang Shen; Paul A Friedman; Thomas M Munger; Jae K Oh; Kristi H Monahan; Janis M Haroldson; David O Hodge; Regina M Herges; Stephen C Hammill; Douglas L Packer Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2011-07-11
Authors: Ross J Hunter; Thomas J Berriman; Ihab Diab; Ravindu Kamdar; Laura Richmond; Victoria Baker; Farai Goromonzi; Vinit Sawhney; Edward Duncan; Stephen P Page; Waqas Ullah; Beth Unsworth; Jamil Mayet; Mehul Dhinoja; Mark J Earley; Simon Sporton; Richard J Schilling Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2014-01-01
Authors: Philip J Gentlesk; William H Sauer; Edward P Gerstenfeld; David Lin; Sanjay Dixit; Erica Zado; David Callans; Francis E Marchlinski Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2006-11-01
Authors: Mohammed N Khan; Pierre Jaïs; Jennifer Cummings; Luigi Di Biase; Prashanthan Sanders; David O Martin; Josef Kautzner; Steven Hao; Sakis Themistoclakis; Raffaele Fanelli; Domenico Potenza; Raimondo Massaro; Oussama Wazni; Robert Schweikert; Walid Saliba; Paul Wang; Amin Al-Ahmad; Salwa Beheiry; Pietro Santarelli; Randall C Starling; Antonio Dello Russo; Gemma Pelargonio; Johannes Brachmann; Volker Schibgilla; Aldo Bonso; Michela Casella; Antonio Raviele; Michel Haïssaguerre; Andrea Natale Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-10-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David G Jones; Shouvik K Haldar; Wajid Hussain; Rakesh Sharma; Darrel P Francis; Shelley L Rahman-Haley; Theresa A McDonagh; S Richard Underwood; Vias Markides; Tom Wong Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-03-07 Impact factor: 24.094