PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 17, 2019European Heart Journal136 citationsOpen Access

Atrial fibrillation ablation in practice: assessing CABANA generalizability

View Full Paper
PNPeter A. NoseworthyBGBernard J. GershDKDavid M. Kent

Key Result

Ablation was associated with a reduction in the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, and cardiac arrest compared to medical therapy (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.70-0.81; P<0.001).

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=183,760)

Structured PICO

Does ablation reduce the composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, and cardiac arrest in patients with atrial fibrillation compared to medical therapy?

P
Population
183,760 patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) from a large US administrative database
I
Intervention
Ablation
C
Comparator
Medical therapy alone (antiarrhythmic or rate control drugs)
O
Outcome
Composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, and cardiac arrestcomposite

In a large real-world US cohort, AF ablation was associated with a 25% reduction in the composite of mortality, stroke, bleeding, and cardiac arrest compared to medical therapy, supporting the generalizability of the CABANA trial.

Main Result

Effect estimate: HR 0.75 (95% CI 0.70-0.81)

p-value: p=<0.001

Abstract

AIMS: The Catheter Ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation (CABANA) trial aimed to assess the impact of ablation on morbidity and mortality. This observational study was conducted in parallel to CABANA to assess trial generalizability. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a large US administrative database, we identified 183 760 patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with ablation or medical therapy (antiarrhythmic or rate control drugs) between 1 August 2009 and 30 April 2016 (CABANA enrolment period). Propensity score weighting was used to balance patients treated with ablation (N = 12 032) or medical therapy alone (N = 171 728) on 90 dimensions. Ablation was associated with a reduction in the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, and cardiac arrest hazard ratio (HR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.81; P < 0.001. The majority of patients (73.8%) were potentially trial eligible; among whom the risk reduction associated with ablation was greatest (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.63-0.77; P < 0.001). Among the 3.8% of patients who failed to meet the inclusion criterion, i.e. patients under 65 years without stroke risk factors, the event rates were low and there was no significant relationship with ablation (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29-1.56; P = 0.35). Among the 22.4% patients who met at least one of the trial exclusion criteria, there was a lesser but statistically significant reduction associated with ablation (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75-0.95; P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: In routine clinical care, ablation was associated with a reduction in the primary CABANA composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, and cardiac arrest, particularly in patients who were eligible for the trial.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Noseworthy et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=183,760). Ablation vs. Medical therapy (antiarrhythmic or rate control drugs) was evaluated on Composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, and cardiac arrest (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.81, p=<0.001). Ablation was associated with a reduction in the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, and cardiac arrest compared to medical therapy (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.70-0.81; P<0.001).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a07a120b2d9a7d54307ada2https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz085
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper