Does atrial fibrillation ablation reduce death and cardiovascular admission in patients with atrial fibrillation and underlying HFpEF compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy?
Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation provides significant clinical benefits, including reduced cardiovascular hospitalization or death, in patients with underlying HFpEF compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy.
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is Class I recommendation in selected heart failure (HF) patients with reduced ejection fraction; less is known in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of AF ablation in patients with HFpEF. METHODS: FPEF score of ≥6. Treatment effects of baseline HFpEF likelihood on the AF ablation for death and cardiovascular admission, AF recurrence, and functional status were assessed. RESULTS: FPEF score (55% of the entire cohort) resulted in a significant treatment effect modulation (P for interaction = 0.027), with a lower risk for cardiovascular hospitalization or death in patients with a high likelihood of HFpEF (HR: 0.82 95% CI: 0.69-0.98; P = 0.025), but not in patients without (HR: 1.00 95% CI: 0.82-1.22; P = 0.987). Although patients with a high likelihood of HFpEF were at a higher risk for AF recurrence, the greatest treatment effect of AF ablation on AF recurrence was observed in patients with a high likelihood of HFpEF (P for interaction = 0.035). In a sensitivity analysis in a subset of patients with echocardiographic evidence of HFpEF (n = 225), a similar treatment interaction was found. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing AF ablation, the presence of underlying HFpEF (either by HFpEF probability or defined by echocardiography) was associated with a larger benefit with AF ablation on clinical outcome, AF recurrence, and functional status. (Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation CABANA; NCT00911508).
Martens et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: