This systematic review summarizes the procedural safety, efficacy, and effects on functional class and quality of life of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with chronic heart failure.
Systematic Review
Does catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation improve efficacy, safety, functional class, and quality of life in patients with chronic heart failure?
This systematic review summarizes the evidence on the safety, efficacy, and impact on quality of life of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with chronic heart failure.
Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AFCA) is a widely recommended treatment for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) patients refractory to pharmacological treatment. Catheter ablation of AF is becoming a therapeutic option also among patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), on top of optimal medical treatment, being this arrhythmia related to a higher risk of death and/or symptom's worsening. In fact, in this setting, clinical evidences are continuously increasing. The present systematic review pools all published experiences concerning AFCA among CHF patients, or patients with structural cardiomyopathies, in order to summarize procedural safety and efficacy in this specific population. Moreover, the effects of AFCA on functional class and quality of life and the different procedural protocols available are discussed. The present work, therefore, attempts to provide an evidence-based clinical perspective to optimize clinical indication and tailor procedural characteristics and endpoints to patients affected by CHF referred for AFCA.
Anselmino et al. (Mon,) conducted a systematic review in Atrial fibrillation and chronic heart failure. Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation was evaluated on Procedural safety and efficacy. This systematic review summarizes the procedural safety, efficacy, and effects on functional class and quality of life of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with chronic heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: