Why the study?
Does catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation reduce the risk of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack compared to general AF management or cardioversion?
Does catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation reduce the risk of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack compared to general AF management or cardioversion?
Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation is associated with a significantly lower long-term risk of ischemic stroke or TIA compared to general AF management or cardioversion.
Ablation was associated with lower postindex stroke/TIA rates in matched AF cohorts; leaves open whether randomized trials will confirm benefit.
Background: We sought to determine whether catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with reduced occurrence of ischemic cerebrovascular events. Methods and results: Using routinely collected hospital data, ablation patients were matched to two control cohorts via direct and propensity score matching. A total of 4,991 ablation patients were matched 1:1 to general AF controls with no ablation, and 5,407 ablation patients were similarly matched to controls who underwent cardioversion. Yearly rates of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (stroke/TIA) before and after an index date were compared between cohorts. Index date was defined as the first ablation, the first cardioversion, or the second AF event in the general AF cohort. Matched populations had very similar demographic and comorbidity profiles, including nearly identical CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc risk distribution ( p -values 0.6948 and 0.8152 vs general AF and cardioversion cohorts). Statistical models of stroke/TIA risk in the preindex period showed no difference in annual event rates between cohorts (mean±standard error 0.30% ± 0.08% ablation vs 0.28% ± 0.07% general AF, p =0.8292; 0.37% ± 0.09% ablation vs 0.42% ± 0.08% cardioversion, p =0.5198). Postindex models showed significantly lower annual rates of stroke/TIA in ablation patients compared with each control group over 5 years (0.64% ± 0.11% ablation vs 1.84% ± 0.23% general AF, p <0.0001; 0.82% ± 0.15% ablation vs 1.37% ± 0.18% cardioversion, p =0.0222). Conclusion: Matching resulted in cohorts having the same baseline risks and rates of ischemic cerebrovascular events. After the index date, there were significantly lower yearly event rates in the ablation cohort. These results suggest the divergence in outcome rates stems from variance in the treatment pathways beginning at the index date.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jarman et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: