Why the study?
Data are limited regarding the long-term outcomes of patients with AF who failed antiarrhythmic drugs and refuse radiofrequency catheter ablation.
Does radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) reduce all-cause mortality or ischemic stroke in patients with antiarrhythmic drug-refractory atrial fibrillation compared to refusing the procedure?
Does radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) reduce all-cause mortality or ischemic stroke in patients with antiarrhythmic drug-refractory atrial fibrillation compared to refusing the procedure?
In patients with drug-refractory atrial fibrillation, undergoing radiofrequency catheter ablation is associated with a significantly lower risk of ischemic stroke compared to refusing the procedure.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Higher stroke risk with RFCA refusal in refractory AF warrants caution in decisions; leaves open causality and needs RCT confirmation.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Recent studies have demonstrated that early rhythm control for first-line treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) improved cardiovascular outcomes. However, there is limited data regarding the long-term outcome of patients who failed antiarrhythmic drugs and who refuse radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA). METHODS: Patients with AF who were refractory to antiarrhythmic drugs and had refused further rhythm control attempts via RFCA were retrospectively identified and propensity-score (PS) matched with those who had been treated with RFCA. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality or ischemic stroke. RESULTS: A total of 169 patients who refused rhythm control with RFCA and PS matched 169 patients who had been treated with RFCA were included for analysis. During a mean follow-up of 4.3 (2.3;6.9) years, maintenance of sinus rhythm was more achieved in RFCA group (7 [4.1%] in Refuse group vs. 133 [78.7%] in RFCA group, p < 0.001). The incidence of ischemic stroke was significantly higher in patients who refused RFCA compared with patients who underwent RFCA (2.96 per 100 person-years in the Refused group vs. 0.74 per 100 person-years in the RFCA group, log-rank p < 0.001), but all-cause mortality was not significantly different (log-rank p = 0.8). Refusal of attempted rhythm control via RFCA was an independent risk factor for ischemic stroke on multivariate Cox analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-8.53, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: In patients with antiarrhythmic drug-refractory AF, the risk of stroke was significantly higher in patients who refused rhythm control via RFCA compared with that of those treated with RFCA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: