Several clinical risk scores have been developed to predict atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation or arrhythmia progression, but their predictive value remains limited and requires further validation.
Systematic Review
Do clinical risk scores predict outcomes of rhythm control or arrhythmia progression in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Several clinical risk scores have been developed to predict AF recurrence after catheter ablation or AF progression, but they currently have limited validation and require testing in large prospective cohorts before routine clinical application.
Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are commonly managed with rhythm control strategy, but the natural history of this common arrhythmia leads itself to progression from paroxysmal to persistent or permanent AF, and recurrences are evident despite rhythm control treatments using cardioversion or catheter ablation. Numerous clinical factors have been associated with outcomes of rhythm control or arrhythmia progression in patients with AF. The more common factors have been used to formulate risk stratification scores, to help predict the outcomes of rhythm control treatments or AF progression. This review article provides an overview on the published clinical risk scores related to outcomes of rhythm control strategy or AF progression.
Deng et al. (Tue,) conducted a systematic review in Atrial fibrillation. Clinical risk scores (e.g., HATCH, ALARMEc, BASE-AF2, APPLE, CAAP-AF, MB-LATER) was evaluated on Predictive value (c-index or AUC) for atrial fibrillation recurrence or progression. Several clinical risk scores have been developed to predict atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation or arrhythmia progression, but their predictive value remains limited and requires further validation.