Key result
Dronedarone shows no benefit over amiodarone for preventing AF recurrence after catheter ablation.
Why the study?
AF recurrence remains a major challenge after catheter ablation, and whether dronedarone or amiodarone should be preferred during the post-ablation blanking period is unresolved.
Does dronedarone prevent atrial fibrillation recurrence compared to amiodarone in patients after catheter ablation?
Meta-Analysis (n=996)
No
Does dronedarone prevent atrial fibrillation recurrence compared to amiodarone in patients after catheter ablation?
Dronedarone and amiodarone are equally effective at preventing atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation, but they possess distinct safety profiles that necessitate individualized patient selection.
May guide post-ablation agent selection by safety profile; leaves open confirmation in dedicated randomized trials.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence remains a major challenge after catheter ablation, and whether dronedarone or amiodarone should be preferred during the post-ablation blanking period is unresolved. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing these 2 agents after AF catheter ablation. Five single-center Chinese studies (1 open-label randomized trial and 4 retrospective cohorts) enrolling 996 patients (507 dronedarone and 489 amiodarone) were included. In reconstructed individual patient data from 4 studies, AF recurrence did not differ between dronedarone and amiodarone (hazard ratio [HR] 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75–1.50; P = 0.746), confirmed by a 30-day landmark analysis (HR 1.08; 95% CI, 0.75–1.56; P = 0.690), by study-level pooling of HRs (HR 1.06; 95% CI, 0.74–1.52; I 2 = 0%), and by restricted mean survival time analysis. Recurrence also did not differ during the blanking period (risk ratio [RR] 1.09; 95% CI, 0.85–1.40) or over long-term follow-up (RR 1.17; 95% CI, 0.89–1.55). Dronedarone was associated with lower risks of QTc-interval prolongation (RR 0.39; 95% CI, 0.19–0.80) and thyroid dysfunction (RR 0.37; 95% CI, 0.24–0.57) but higher risks of gastrointestinal (RR 7.72; 95% CI, 2.10–28.37) and dermatologic (RR 4.20; 95% CI, 1.06–16.53) adverse events. Dronedarone and amiodarone appear equally effective at preventing AF recurrence after catheter ablation but differ in safety, so selection should be individualized according to patient-specific tolerability and toxicity risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Emara et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Atrial fibrillation after catheter ablation (n=996). Dronedarone vs. Amiodarone was evaluated on Atrial fibrillation recurrence (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.75-1.50, p=0.746). Dronedarone did not differ from amiodarone in preventing atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.75-1.50; P=0.746), though their safety profiles differed.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: