Key result
Catheter ablation is an effective alternative to antiarrhythmic drug therapy for maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with symptomatic, drug-resistant paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
Why the study?
Does catheter ablation provide more benefits compared to anti-arrhythmic drug therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Does catheter ablation provide more benefits compared to anti-arrhythmic drug therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation?
This review analyzes the current literature to determine whether catheter ablation is more beneficial than anti-arrhythmic drug therapy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation.
Supports ablation as alternative for sinus rhythm in drug-resistant paroxysmal AF; leaves open need for RCTs on outcomes.
In the past years, catheter ablation has evolved into an effective treatment option for symptomatic, drug-resistant atrial fibrillation (AF) and it has recently been implemented as a primary treatment strategy for patients with paroxysmal AF. Although a significant number of studies have evaluated the potential benefits of catheter ablation compared with anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD)-therapy, to date, there are only a small number of randomised controlled trials in the literature, and several issues remain unsolved. The aim of this review is to analyze the current literature regarding this important issue and further discuss the question, whether catheter ablation may be more beneficial when compared to AAD therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rillig et al. (2013) conducted a review in Atrial Fibrillation. Catheter ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) was evaluated. Catheter ablation is an effective alternative to antiarrhythmic drug therapy for maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with symptomatic, drug-resistant paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: