Is ablation to atrial fibrillation termination of persistent atrial fibrillation the end point?

BACKGROUND: The ideal ablation strategy and end point for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) have not been well founded. Defining periprocedural AF termination as the end point of catheter ablation is still controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to analyze the differences between periprocedural AF termination and non-termination in the long-term AF recurrence rate and postoperative complications. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by a systematic search of electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library from January 2008 to August 2019. The primary outcome was freedom from AF or any atrial arrhythmia without antiarrhythmic drugs at the long-term (≥12 months) follow-up. The secondary outcome was overall postoperative complication rates. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was pooled for these outcomes. A forest plot, fixed-effects model or random-effect model, Q test, I statistic, and Egger funnel plot were used in the statistical analysis. RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, no significant difference was found in freedom from AF at the long-term follow-up between patients in whom AF termination was achieved and not achieved (RR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.78-1.09, P = .36, I = 69%). Patients with AF non-termination had a lower complication occurrence rate than those with AF termination (RR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.11-2.73, P = .02, I = 0%). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis suggests that AF termination is not a reliable procedural end point during ablation of persistent AF.