Key result
Hybrid ablation resulted in a higher rate of freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias off antiarrhythmic drugs compared with catheter ablation (89% vs 41%, P=0.002).
Why the study?
Catheter ablation is less satisfactory in persistent AF, and the effectiveness and safety of hybrid ablation versus catheter ablation needed direct comparison.
Does hybrid ablation improve freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias compared to catheter ablation in ablation-naive patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
RCT (n=41)
unblinded
randomized
Does hybrid ablation improve freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias compared to catheter ablation in ablation-naive patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Event Rate: 89% vs 41%
p-value: p=0.002
Hybrid ablation significantly improves 12-month freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias compared to catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, with a comparable rate of serious adverse events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports hybrid ablation for persistent AF; extends limited RCT evidence on combined approaches.
Heijden et al. (2023) conducted an RCT in persistent atrial fibrillation (n=41). Hybrid ablation vs. Catheter ablation was evaluated on freedom from any atrial tachyarrhythmia >5 minutes off antiarrhythmic drugs after 12 months (p=0.002). Hybrid ablation resulted in a higher rate of freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias off antiarrhythmic drugs compared with catheter ablation (89% vs 41%, P=0.002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: