Meta-analysis of the therapeutic effects of various methods for the treatment of chronic atrial fibrillation

Lin,Gang; Lu,Hui-He; Shen,Yi; Huang,Jian-Fei; Shi,Lin-Sheng; Guo,Yi-Nan

doi:10.3892/etm.2013.1158

Meta-analysis of the therapeutic effects of various methods for the treatment of chronic atrial fibrillation

Authors:
- Gang Lin
- Hui-He Lu
- Yi Shen
- Jian-Fei Huang
- Lin-Sheng Shi
- Yi-Nan Guo
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Cardiovascular Medical Department, The First People's Hospital of Nantong, Nantong, Jiangsu 226001, P.R. China, School of Public Health, Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu 226009, P.R. China
Published online on: June 14, 2013 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2013.1158
Pages: 489-496

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyze the therapeutic effects of various methods for the treatment of chronic atrial fibrillation (AF). Randomized controlled trials (RCT) concerning drug therapy and catheter ablation for the treatment of chronic AF were retrieved. The RevMan 5.1 software package was used for the meta-analysis. A total of 20 papers were assessed in this study. The results of the analysis indicated that the success rate was lower [odds ratio (OR), 8.94; 95% confidence interval (CI), 4.70‑17.02; P<0.0001] and the relapse rate was higher (OR, 0.07, 95% CI, 0.05-0.10; P<0.0001) for drug therapy compared with that for catheter ablation. With regard to different catheter ablation procedures, the success rate for pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI) was lower compared with that for PVAI plus complex fractionated atrial electrogram (CFAE; OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37-0.78; P=0.0001). Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus left atrial ablation (LAA) had a higher success rate compared with PVI alone (OR, 2.79; 95% CI, 1.59‑4.88, P=0.0003). There was not identified to be a significant difference in the success rates between PVAI and CFAE (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 0.06-205.74; P=0.76) or between PVI and circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI; OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.29-3.00; P=0.91). All the funnel plots of publication bias were essentially symmetrical. In conclusion, the success rate was higher and the relapse rate was lower for catheter ablation compared with drug therapy. Among the different procedures of catheter ablation, there were no significant differences in success rate between two single procedures; however, the success rates were higher for the combined methods compared with those for the single methods.

View Figures

View References

1.	Furberg CD, Psaty BM, Manolio TA, et al: Prevalence of atrial fibrillation in elderly subjects (the Cardiovascular Health Study). Am J Cardiol. 74:236–241. 1994. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2.	Kannel WB, Wolf PA, Benjamin EJ and Levy D: Prevalence, incidence, prognosis, and predisposing conditions for atrial fibrillation: population-based estimates. Am J Cardiol. 82:2N–9N. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3.	Singer DE: Overview of the randomized trials to prevent stroke in atrial fibrillation. Ann Epidemiol. 3:563–567. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4.	Kazemian P, Oudit G and Jugdutt BI: Atrial fibrillation and heart failure in the elderly. Heart Fail Rev. 17:597–613. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5.	Fuster V, Rydén LE, Cannom DS, et al: ACCF/AHA/HRS focused updates incorporated into the ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines developed in partnership with the European Society of Cardiology and in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol. 57:e101–e198. 2011.
6.	Fuster V, Rydén LE, Cannom DS, et al: ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2001 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation): developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation. 114:e257–e354. 2006.
7.	Joshi S, Choi AD, Kamath GS, et al: Prevalence, predictors, and prognosis of atrial fibrillation early after pulmonary vein isolation: findings from 3 months of continuous automatic ECG loop recordings. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 20:1089–1094. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8.	Takahashi Y, Takahashi A, Kuwahara T, et al: Clinical characteristics of patients with persistent atrial fibrillation successfully treated by left atrial ablation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 3:465–471. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9.	Li C, Ding X, Zhang J, et al: Does the E/e’ index predict the maintenance of sinus rhythm after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation? Echocardiography. 27:630–636. 2010.
10.	Wilber DJ, Pappone C, Neuzil P, et al: Comparison of antiar-rhythmic drug therapy and radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 303:333–340. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar
11.	Pappone C, Augello G, Sala S, et al: A randomized trial of circumferential pulmonary vein ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the APAF study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 11:2340–2347. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12.	Pappone C, Vicedomini G, Augello G, et al: Radiofrequency catheter ablation and antiarrhythmic drug therapy: a prospective, randomized, 4-year follow-up trial: the APAF study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 4:808–814. 2011.PubMed/NCBI
13.	Krittayaphong R, Raungrattanaamporn O, Bhuripanyo K, et al: A randomized clinical trial of the efficacy of radiofrequency catheter ablation and amiodarone in the treatment of symptomatic atrial fibrillation. J Med Assoc Thai. 86(Suppl 1): S8–S16. 2003.PubMed/NCBI
14.	Forleo GB, Mantica M, De Luca L, et al: Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2: results from a randomized study comparing pulmonary vein isolation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 20:22–28. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar
15.	Jaïs P, Cauchemez B, Macle L, et al: Catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drugs for atrial fibrillation: the A4 study. Circulation. 118:2498–2505. 2008.PubMed/NCBI
16.	Oral H, Pappone C, Chugh A, et al: Circumferential pulmonary-vein ablation for chronic atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2:934–941. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar
17.	Stabile G, Bertaglia E, Senatore G, et al: Catheter ablation treatment in patients with drug-refractory atrial fibrillation: a prospective, multi-centre, randomized, controlled study (Catheter Ablation For The Cure Of Atrial Fibrillation Study). Eur Heart J. 27:216–221. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar
18.	Di Biase L, Elayi CS, Fahmy TS, et al: Atrial fibrillation ablation strategies for paroxysmal patients: randomized comparison between different techniques. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 42:113–119. 2009.
19.	Chen M, Yang B, Chen H, et al: Randomized comparison between pulmonary vein antral isolation versus complex fractionated electrogram ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 22:973–981. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar
20.	Elayi CS, Verma A, Di Biase L, et al: Ablation for longstanding permanent atrial fibrillation: results from a randomized study comparing three different strategies. Heart Rhythm. 5:1658–1664. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar
21.	Oral H, Chugh A, Yoshida K, et al: A randomized assessment of the incremental role of ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms after antral pulmonary vein isolation for long-lasting persistent atrial fibrillation. J Am Col Cardiol. 53:782–789. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar
22.	Verma A, Patel D, Famy T, et al: Efficacy of adjuvant anterior left atrial ablation during intracardiac echocardiography-guided pulmonary vein antrum isolation for atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 18:151–156. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar
23.	Willems S, Klemm H, Rostock T, et al: Substrate modification combined with pulmonary vein isolation improves outcome of catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized comparison. Eur Heart J. 27:2871–2878. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar
24.	Hocini M, Jaïs P, Sanders P, et al: Techniques, evaluation, and consequences of linear block at the left atrial roof in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized study. Circulation. 112:3688–3696. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25.	Haïssaguerre M, Sanders P, Hocini M, et al: Changes in atrial fibrillation cycle length and inducibility during catheter ablation and their relation to outcome. Circulation. 109:3007–3013. 2004.PubMed/NCBI
26.	Sheikh I, Krum D, Cooley R, et al: Pulmonary vein isolation and linear lesions in atrial fibrillation ablation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 17:103–109. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27.	Fiala M, Chovancík J, Nevralová R, et al: Pulmonary vein isolation using segmental versus electroanatomical circumferential ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: over 3-year results of a prospective randomized study. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 22:13–21. 2008.
28.	Karch MR, Zrenner B, Deisenhofer I, et al: Freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a randomized comparison between 2 current ablation strategies. Circulation. 111:2875–2880. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar
29.	Nilsson B, Chen X, Pehrson S, et al: Recurrence of pulmonary vein conduction and atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation: a randomized trial of the ostial versus the extraostial ablation strategy. Am Heart J. 152:537–538. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar
30.	Chung MK, Shemanski L, Sherman DG, et al: Functional status in rate-versus rhythm-control strategies for atrial fibrillation: results of the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Functional Status Substudy. J Am Coll of Cardiol. 46:1891–1899. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar
31.	Reynolds MR, Gunnarsson CL, Hunter TD, et al: Health outcomes with catheter ablation or antiarrhythmic drug therapy in atrial fibrillation: results of a propensity-matched analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 5:171–181. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
32.	Ogawa S, Yamashita T, Yamazaki T, et al: Optional treatment stategy for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: J-RHYTHM study. Circ J. 73:242–248. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33.	Tan HW, Wang XH, Shi HF, et al: Left atrial wall thickness: anatomic aspects relevant to catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Chin Med J (Engl). 125:12–15. 2012.PubMed/NCBI
34.	Hunter RJ, Liu Y, Lu Y, et al: Left atrial wall stress distribution and its relationship to electrophysiologic remodeling in persistent atrial fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 5:351–360. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI