1. Home
  2. anti-arrhythmia agents

anti-arrhythmia agents

Progression of Atrial Fibrillation after Cryoablation or Drug Therapy

Author/s: 
Andrade, J.G., Deyell, M. W., Macle, L., Wells, G. A., Bennett, M., Essebag, V., Champagne, J., Roux, J., Yung, D., Skanes, A., Khaykin, Y., Morillo, C., Jolly, U., Novak, P., Lockwood, E., Cadrin-Tourigny, J., Kochhäuser, S., Verma, A.

Background: Atrial fibrillation is a chronic, progressive disorder, and persistent forms of atrial fibrillation are associated with increased risks of thromboembolism and heart failure. Catheter ablation as initial therapy may modify the pathogenic mechanism of atrial fibrillation and alter progression to persistent atrial fibrillation.

Methods: We report the 3-year follow-up of patients with paroxysmal, untreated atrial fibrillation who were enrolled in a trial in which they had been randomly assigned to undergo initial rhythm-control therapy with cryoballoon ablation or to receive antiarrhythmic drug therapy. All the patients had implantable loop recorders placed at the time of trial entry, and evaluation was conducted by means of downloaded daily recordings and in-person visits every 6 months. Data regarding the first episode of persistent atrial fibrillation (lasting ≥7 days or lasting 48 hours to 7 days but requiring cardioversion for termination), recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia (defined as atrial fibrillation, flutter, or tachycardia lasting ≥30 seconds), the burden of atrial fibrillation (percentage of time in atrial fibrillation), quality-of-life metrics, health care utilization, and safety were collected.

Results: A total of 303 patients were enrolled, with 154 patients assigned to undergo initial rhythm-control therapy with cryoballoon ablation and 149 assigned to receive antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Over 36 months of follow-up, 3 patients (1.9%) in the ablation group had an episode of persistent atrial fibrillation, as compared with 11 patients (7.4%) in the antiarrhythmic drug group (hazard ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.70). Recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia occurred in 87 patients in the ablation group (56.5%) and in 115 in the antiarrhythmic drug group (77.2%) (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.67). The median percentage of time in atrial fibrillation was 0.00% (interquartile range, 0.00 to 0.12) in the ablation group and 0.24% (interquartile range, 0.01 to 0.94) in the antiarrhythmic drug group. At 3 years, 8 patients (5.2%) in the ablation group and 25 (16.8%) in the antiarrhythmic drug group had been hospitalized (relative risk, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.66). Serious adverse events occurred in 7 patients (4.5%) in the ablation group and in 15 (10.1%) in the antiarrhythmic drug group.

Conclusions: Initial treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation with catheter cryoballoon ablation was associated with a lower incidence of persistent atrial fibrillation or recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia over 3 years of follow-up than initial use of antiarrhythmic drugs. (Funded by the Cardiac Arrhythmia Network of Canada and others; EARLY-AF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02825979.).

Keywords 
quality of life Tachycardia Patient Acceptance of Health Care Catheters Confidence Intervals

Effect of Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy on Mortality, Stroke, Bleeding, and Cardiac Arrest Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The CABANA Randomized Clinical Trial

Author/s: 
Packer, Douglas L., Mark, Daniel B., Robb, RIchard A., Monahan, Kristi H., Bahnson, Tristram D., Poole, Jessica E., Noseworthy, Peter A., Rosenberg, Yves D., Jeffries, Neal, Mitchell, L. Brent, Flaker, Greg C., Pokushalov, Evgeny, Romanov, ALexander, Bunch, T. Jared, Noelker, Georg, Ardashev, Andrey, Revishvili, Amiran, Wilber, David J., Cappato, Riccardo, Kuck, Karl-Heinz, Hindricks, Gerhard, Davies, D. Wyn, Kowey, Peter R., Naccarelli, Gerald V., Reiffel, James A., Piccini, Jonathan P., Silverstein, Adam P., Al-Khalidi, Hussein R., Lee, Kerry L.

IMPORTANCE:

Catheter ablation is effective in restoring sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation (AF), but its effects on long-term mortality and stroke risk are uncertain.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine whether catheter ablation is more effective than conventional medical therapy for improving outcomes in AF.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:

The Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation trial is an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicenter, randomized trial involving 126 centers in 10 countries. A total of 2204 symptomatic patients with AF aged 65 years and older or younger than 65 years with 1 or more risk factors for stroke were enrolled from November 2009 to April 2016, with follow-up through December 31, 2017.

INTERVENTIONS:

The catheter ablation group (n = 1108) underwent pulmonary vein isolation, with additional ablative procedures at the discretion of site investigators. The drug therapy group (n = 1096) received standard rhythm and/or rate control drugs guided by contemporaneous guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:

The primary end point was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Among 13 prespecified secondary end points, 3 are included in this report: all-cause mortality; total mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization; and AF recurrence.

RESULTS:

Of the 2204 patients randomized (median age, 68 years; 37.2% female; 42.9% had paroxysmal AF and 57.1% had persistent AF), 89.3% completed the trial. Of the patients assigned to catheter ablation, 1006 (90.8%) underwent the procedure. Of the patients assigned to drug therapy, 301 (27.5%) ultimately received catheter ablation. In the intention-to-treat analysis, over a median follow-up of 48.5 months, the primary end point occurred in 8.0% (n = 89) of patients in the ablation group vs 9.2% (n = 101) of patients in the drug therapy group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65-1.15]; P = .30). Among the secondary end points, outcomes in the ablation group vs the drug therapy group, respectively, were 5.2% vs 6.1% for all-cause mortality (HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.60-1.21]; P = .38), 51.7% vs 58.1% for death or cardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.74-0.93]; P = .001), and 49.9% vs 69.5% for AF recurrence (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.45-0.60]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:

Among patients with AF, the strategy of catheter ablation, compared with medical therapy, did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. However, the estimated treatment effect of catheter ablation was affected by lower-than-expected event rates and treatment crossovers, which should be considered in interpreting the results of the trial.

Keywords 
symptomatic atrial fib atrial fib cather ablation
Subscribe to anti-arrhythmia agents