Key result
Catheter ablation outperforms lifestyle modification plus AADs for 1-year AF freedom in patients with obesity.
Why the study?
Obesity is an important risk factor for AF, and it was uncertain whether lifestyle modification combined with antiarrhythmic drugs is noninferior to catheter ablation in obese patients with AF.
Does catheter ablation improve freedom from atrial fibrillation compared to lifestyle modification with antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with atrial fibrillation and obesity?
Does catheter ablation improve freedom from atrial fibrillation compared to lifestyle modification with antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with atrial fibrillation and obesity?
Catheter ablation is superior to lifestyle modification combined with antiarrhythmic drugs for achieving freedom from atrial fibrillation at 1 year in obese patients with AF.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“Obesity is a very important risk factor for atrial fibrillation and is very prevalent in all trials assessing catheter ablation and antiarrhythmic drugs in AF treatment. The median BMI in the most recent trials is 30 kg/m2. That means half of the patients in these trials are obese.”
Prioritizes catheter ablation for rhythm control in obese AF; challenges lifestyle modification plus AAD sufficiency despite superior weight loss.
BACKGROUND: Obesity is an important risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF). Nonrandomized studies have shown that weight loss and increased physical activity are associated with AF reduction. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to assess whether treatment based on lifestyle modification (LFM; directed weight loss and physical exercise) in combination with antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) is noninferior to catheter ablation (CA) in patients with AF and obesity. METHODS: In a randomized multicenter noninferiority trial, we enrolled patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF and a body mass index (BMI) of 30-40 kg/m2. Patients were randomized to the CA vs LFM+AAD groups in a 1:1 ratio. Seven-day electrocardiographic Holter recordings were performed every 3 months. The primary endpoint was AF freedom during the 12 months after randomization (ie, absence of any AF episode lasting >30 s; the blanking period was 3 months). Secondary endpoints included AF burden, peak oxygen uptake during cardiopulmonary exercise testing, changes in metabolic parameters, and quality of life as assessed with the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT) questionnaire, all compared between randomization and 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 212 patients were enrolled and randomized. Nine patients withdrew consent, leaving 203 patients for the final analysis; 100 patients were allocated to the CA group and 103 to the LFM+AAD group (overall age 60 ± 9 years, 31.5% female, BMI 34.9 ± 3.0 kg/m2, 55.7% with paroxysmal AF); the mean follow-up time was 23.5 months. The percentage of patients with AF freedom at 12 months was 73.0% (95% CI: 64.3%-81.7%) in the CA group and 34.6% (95% CI: 25.3%-43.9%) in the LFM+AAD group (Pnoninferiority = 0.99, Psuperiority <0.001). Weight change (-6.4 ± 7.9 kg vs -0.35 ± 4.8 kg; P < 0.001) and decreased HbA1c, were more significant in the LFM+AAD group than in the CA group. CONCLUSIONS: Despite important metabolic improvements associated with LFM, CA was superior to LFM combined with AADs in improving freedom from AF at 1 year in patients with AF and obesity.
Osmančík et al. (2025) studied this question. Catheter ablation was superior to lifestyle modification plus antiarrhythmic drugs in improving 1-year freedom from atrial fibrillation in patients with atrial fibrillation and obesity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: