Key result
HotBalloon ablation was superior to antiarrhythmic drug therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, achieving a chronic success rate of 59.0% vs 4.7% at 9 months (p<0.001).
Why the study?
Does HotBalloon ablation improve chronic success rates compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy in patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation?
RCT (n=143)
2:1
Yes
Does HotBalloon ablation improve chronic success rates compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy in patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Event Rate: 59% vs 4.7%
p-value: p=<0.001
HotBalloon ablation significantly improves 9-month chronic success rates compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy in patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, though it carries an 11.2% major complication rate.
Supports HotBalloon ablation in drug-refractory paroxysmal AF; confirms ablation superiority over antiarrhythmic drugs.
BACKGROUND: Point-by-point catheter ablation is an established treatment for drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). However, it is time consuming, requires excellent technique to achieve complete pulmonary vein (PV) isolation, and is associated with severe complications. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a HotBalloon ablation (HBA) compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy (ADT) for the treatment of PAF. METHODS: A prospective multicenter randomized controlled study was conducted in Japan. Patients with symptomatic PAF refractory to antiarrhythmic drugs (Class I to IV) were randomized to HBA or ADT at a 2:1 ratio and assessed for effectiveness in a comparable 9-month follow-up period. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients in the HBA group and 43 patients in the ADT group received treatment at 17 sites. HBA procedure produced acute complete PV isolation in 98.0% (392 of 400) of the PVs and in 93.0% (93 of 100) of patients in the HBA group. The chronic success rates after the 9-month effective evaluation period were 59.0% in the HBA group (n = 100) and 4.7% in the ADT group (n = 43; p < 0.001). The incidence of major complications was 11.2% (15 of 134 patients). The incidences of PV stenosis (>70%) and transient phrenic nerve injury were 5.2% and 3.7%, respectively. The mean fluoroscopy time was 49.4 ± 26.6 min (n = 134), and the mean procedure duration was 113.9 ± 31.9 min (n = 133). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the superiority of HBA compared with ADT for treatment of patients with PAF, and a favorable safety profile.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sohara et al. (2016) conducted an RCT in Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (n=143). HotBalloon ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic drug therapy was evaluated on Chronic success rate (p=<0.001). HotBalloon ablation was superior to antiarrhythmic drug therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, achieving a chronic success rate of 59.0% vs 4.7% at 9 months (p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: