Bi‐atrial or left atrial ablation of atrial fibrillation during concomitant cardiac surgery: A Bayesian network meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE: Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has become a routine procedure during concomitant cardiac surgery, however, the extension of lesion sets remain controversial. We sought to compare the relative benefit and risk of different lesion sets through a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Trials databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the rhythm outcome of AF patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), left atrial Maze (LAM), bi-atrial Maze (BAM), or no ablation during concomitant cardiac surgery. An NMA was conducted to explore the difference of over 1 year AF freedom as well as risks for early mortality and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI). RESULTS: A total of 2031 patients of 19 RCTs were included. PVI, LAM, and BAM (OR [95% Cr.I]: 5.02 [2.72, 10.02], 7.97 [4.93, 14.29], 8.29 [4.90, 14.86], p < .05) demonstrated higher freedom of AF compared with no ablation, however, no significant difference of rhythm outcome was found among the three ablation strategies based on the random-effects model. BAM was associated with an increase in early mortality when compared with no ablation (OR [95% Cr.I]: 4.08 [1.23, 17.30], p < .05), while none of the remaining comparisons reached statistical difference in terms of early mortality and PPMI. CONCLUSION: Bi-atrial ablation is not superior to left atrial ablation strategies in reducing AF recurrence for un-selected surgical patients. BAM has a higher risk of early mortality than no ablation, but no difference was found between bi-atrial and left atrial ablation in regard to early mortality and PPMI based on the current evidence.