Key result
Biatrial radiofrequency ablation resulted in a significantly higher rate of sinus rhythm maintenance during follow-up compared to uniatrial ablation (73.3% vs 46.7%, p=0.049) in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation undergoing concomitant cardiac surgery.
Why the study?
Does biatrial radiofrequency ablation improve freedom from atrial fibrillation compared to uniatrial ablation in patients with permanent AF undergoing concomitant cardiac surgery?
Cohort (n=30)
No
Does biatrial radiofrequency ablation improve freedom from atrial fibrillation compared to uniatrial ablation in patients with permanent AF undergoing concomitant cardiac surgery?
Absolute Event Rate: 73.3% vs 46.7%
p-value: p=0.049
Biatrial radiofrequency ablation during concomitant cardiac surgery may be more effective than uniatrial ablation for maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation.
Biatrial ablation was associated with higher sinus rhythm maintenance; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commonly sustained cardiac rhythm disturbance. Surgical ablation techniques were developed involving the left atrium only and modifications of the maze procedure in ablating both atria. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare, in patients with permanent AF, the efficacy of uniatrial versus biatrial radiofrequency ablation procedure in the treatment of chronic atrial fibrillation in patients with associated cardiac disease. METHOD: Between September 2003 and May 2009, 30 patients were submitted to the radiofrequency ablation procedure for AF associated with concomitant cardiac surgery; 15 patients underwent a uniatrial procedure, and 15 patients underwent biatrial ablation. The mean age was 47.73 ± 9.85 years, and 53.4% were men. The average followup time was 12.16 ± 10.89 months for the uniatrial group and 7.0 ± 4.0 months for the biatrial group. RESULTS: Neither hospital mortality nor complications related to radiofrequency ablation were was registered. At the time of hospital discharge, 9 patients (60%) were in a state of sinus rhythm in both groups. However, patients undergoing biatrial ablation (range 73.3% versus 46.7%) demonstrated complete freedom from atrial fibrillation at all times. CONCLUSION: Biatrial ablation surgical procedures were more effective in controlling atrial fibrillation than procedures limited to the left atrium.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Breda et al. (2011) conducted a cohort in Permanent atrial fibrillation with associated cardiac disease (n=30). Biatrial radiofrequency ablation vs. Uniatrial radiofrequency ablation was evaluated on Maintenance of sinus rhythm at follow-up (p=0.049). Biatrial radiofrequency ablation resulted in a significantly higher rate of sinus rhythm maintenance during follow-up compared to uniatrial ablation (73.3% vs 46.7%, p=0.049) in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation undergoing concomitant cardiac surgery.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: