Key result
PVI for AF is linked to ~6% lower absolute 10-year mortality vs drugs despite higher costs.
Why the study?
Atrial fibrillation is associated with increased mortality, morbidity, and relevant costs, with treatment options including catheter ablation or rate or rhythm control drugs.
Does a catheter ablation strategy improve clinical outcomes and affect healthcare utilization compared to drug therapy alone in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=21,791)
Does a catheter ablation strategy improve clinical outcomes and affect healthcare utilization compared to drug therapy alone in patients with atrial fibrillation?
A catheter ablation strategy for atrial fibrillation is associated with higher healthcare costs but significantly reduces 10-year all-cause mortality and improves employment rates compared to drug therapy alone.
Should not yet change AF ablation practice; leaves open confirmation of mortality benefit in randomized trials.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent arrhythmia, associated with increased mortality and morbidity and causing relevant costs. Treatment options consist of catheter ablation (PVI) and rate or rhythm control drugs (non-PVI). METHODS: -VASc variables and working "collar". RESULTS: Out of 21,791 AF patients, PSM identified 1013 well-matching pairs (PVI and non-PVI). Over a ten-year period, the PVI treatment strategy group reveals significantly higher inpatient and outpatient expenditures (€2200/year). Positive economic effects can be demonstrated by a 5.1 percentage points (pp) higher employment rate and fewer retirements (7.6pp). Of utmost important is the 5.8pp all-cause mortality reduction over 10 years in the PVI treatment strategy. CONCLUSIONS: A PVI based treatment strategy results in higher healthcare expenditures vs. drug therapy alone. Most of these higher costs were caused by the PVI procedures during this period. Thus, more effective and efficient methods are needed to further reduce costs for the intervention and prevent repeat procedures. The benefit of a PVI treatment strategy is seen in higher employment rates, which are crucial from a societal perspective and should be a strong argument for caregivers. We show a significant reduction in all-cause mortality, which we partly attribute to the PVI procedure itself, to a stricter risk factor assessment and treatment, and a tighter medical adherence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Martinek et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (n=21,791). Catheter ablation (PVI) vs. Rate or rhythm control drugs was evaluated on All-cause mortality and healthcare expenditures. Catheter ablation (PVI) for atrial fibrillation reduced 10-year all-cause mortality by 5.8 percentage points compared to drug therapy, despite higher healthcare expenditures (€2200/year).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: