Key result
Esophagectomy tended to offer a survival benefit for atrioesophageal fistula after catheter ablation (HR 0.163; 95% CI 0.019-1.340; P=0.092), whereas sepsis significantly increased mortality.
Why the study?
The efficacy of different surgical strategies for atrioesophageal fistula following catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation required assessment.
Do different surgical strategies impact survival in patients with atrioesophageal fistula after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=18)
Yes
Do different surgical strategies impact survival in patients with atrioesophageal fistula after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation?
Hazard Ratio: 0.163 (95% CI 0.019–1.34)
p-value: p=0.092
Aggressive surgical strategies, particularly esophagectomy, may offer the best chance of survival for patients with atrioesophageal fistula following atrial fibrillation ablation, whereas sepsis and neurological failure are major risk factors for death.
Hypothesis-generating for esophagectomy in atrioesophageal fistula; prospective validation needed before practice change.
Objective The study objective was to assess the efficacity of different surgical strategies for atrioesophageal fistula after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Methods Between January 2010 and April 2023, all patients with a diagnosis of atrioesophageal fistula or pericardo-esophageal fistula after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation were analyzed retrospectively from the French database EPITHOR. Patients without surgical management were excluded. Results Eighteen patients were included, 15 with atrioesophageal fistula and 3 with pericardo-esophageal fistula. Median follow-up was 89.5 days with an overall survival of 50%. Five patients underwent esophageal stenting, 2 as a bridge-to-esophagectomy with 50% of survival and 3 in association with esophagus and left atrial direct repair with 66% survival. Primary esophageal repair with flap coverage was performed in 8 patients with 25% survival, most of them with sepsis and neurological failure. Seven patients had an esophagectomy with 71% survival, only 2 of them having a neurological failure. Among them, 5 patients underwent a restorative surgery and are still alive. Four patients had a retrosternal colon interposition, and 1 patient had an esogastric anastomosis. Risk factors for death were neurological failure (hazard ratio [HR], 4.91, 95% CI, 0.95-25.22; P = .0057) in univariate analysis and sepsis (HR, 6.25, 95% CI, 1.17-33.3; P = .032) in multivariate analysis. Esophagectomy tended to offer a survival benefit (HR, 0.163, 95% CI, 0.019-1.340; P = .092). The use of cardiopulmonary bypass did not significantly impact survival (HR, 1.953, 95% CI, 0.392-9.719; P = .413). Conclusions Aggressive surgical strategies for managing atrioesophageal fistula are mandatory to offer the best chance of survival.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dupautet et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Atrioesophageal fistula after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (n=18). Esophagectomy vs. Other surgical strategies was evaluated on death (HR 0.163, 95% CI 0.019-1.340, p=0.092). Esophagectomy tended to offer a survival benefit for atrioesophageal fistula after catheter ablation (HR 0.163; 95% CI 0.019-1.340; P=0.092), whereas sepsis significantly increased mortality.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: