Key result
The manuscript discusses the future role of anti-arrhythmic drugs in the treatment of atrial fibrillation as catheter ablation techniques continue to improve.
Why the study?
What will be the role of anti-arrhythmic drugs for atrial fibrillation in the era of increasing use of catheter ablation?
What will be the role of anti-arrhythmic drugs for atrial fibrillation in the era of increasing use of catheter ablation?
This review discusses the future role of anti-arrhythmic drugs in managing atrial fibrillation as catheter ablation techniques continue to improve and become more widely used.
AAD limitations in AF underscore need for alternatives; leaves open optimal integration of ablation versus drugs in practice.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an increasingly important disorder. In most patients the treatment of AF usually employs anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs). Despite the widespread utilization of AADs for the conversion of atrial fibrillation and maintenance of normal sinus rhythm, their use is limited by modest efficacy, frequent intolerance, and the potential for serious ventricular proarrhythmia and organ toxicity. In addition to AADs, ablations for AF have come into vogue. If ablation techniques improve, one might ask whether there will still be a role for AADs, and, if so, what will it be and what agents will be used. This manuscript will attempt to answer these questions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Morrow et al. (2008) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation. Anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs) and catheter ablation was evaluated. The manuscript discusses the future role of anti-arrhythmic drugs in the treatment of atrial fibrillation as catheter ablation techniques continue to improve.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: