Why the study?
Catheter ablation of AF is a complex, invasive procedure carrying risks both acutely and in follow-up, requiring guidance on recognizing complications, management, and surgical ablation approaches.
Provides the 2018 Korean guidelines on the complications, follow-up, and surgical/hybrid approaches for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation.
Informs complication prevention and management in AF ablation; extends guidance on surgical and hybrid indications.
Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most complex interventional electrophysiological procedures. The success of AF ablation is based in large part on freedom from AF recurrence based on electrocardiography (ECG) monitoring. Arrhythmia monitoring can be performed with the use of noncontinuous or continuous ECG monitoring tools. AF ablation is an invasive procedure that entails risks, most of which are present during the acute procedural period. However, complications can also occur in the weeks or months following ablation. Recognizing common symptoms after AF ablation and distinguishing those that require urgent evaluation and referral to an electrophysiologist is an important part of follow-up after AF ablation. This section reviews the complications associated with catheter ablation procedures performed to treat AF. The types and incidence of complications are presented, their mechanisms are explored, and the optimal approach to prevention and treatment is discussed. Finally, surgical and hybrid AF ablation technology and the indications for concomitant open or closed surgical ablation of AF, stand-alone and hybrid surgical ablation of AF are covered in this section.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2018) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation. Catheter ablation was evaluated. The 2018 Korean Guidelines review the complications associated with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation, their mechanisms, prevention, and indications for surgical and hybrid ablation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: