Why the study?
Does minimally-invasive surgical ablation improve AF freedom compared to catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
Does minimally-invasive surgical ablation improve AF freedom compared to catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
Minimally-invasive surgical ablation offers higher AF freedom but at the cost of more severe procedural complications compared to catheter ablation in persistent AF.
Requires weighing higher AF freedom against severe complications in persistent AF; extends comparative evidence for ablation strategies.
In persistent AF patients, minimally-invasive surgical ablation is associated with more procedural complications, but higher AF freedom. As adverse events after surgical ablation appear more severe than in catheter ablation, a patient-tailored therapy choice is warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Berger et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: