Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Sohaib A. Virk, Richard G. Bennett, Clara Chow, Prash Sanders, Jonathan M. Kalman, Stuart Thomas, Saurabh Kumar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Catheter ablation (CA) is highly efficacious for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) but data predominantly comes from patients with preserved ventricular function. We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing CA versus medical therapy for AF associated with heart failure (HF). Methods: Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for RCTs reporting clinical outcomes of CA versus medical therapy for AF in HF patients with ≥6 months’ follow-up (atrioventricular-node ablation/device therapy studies excluded). Primary endpoint was change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Secondary endpoints were 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance, quality of life (QoL; measured by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire [MLHFQ]), peri-procedural mortality, major peri-procedural complications and mid-term (≥1-year) survival. Results: Six RCTs (n = 772 patients; mean age 62 ± 11 years, LVEF 30 ± 9%) were included. Catheter ablation, compared to medical therapy was associated with: greater improvement in LVEF (mean difference [MD] 5.67%; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 3–8; I 2 = 87%; p < 0.001), greater increase in 6MWT distance (MD 25.1 metres; 95% CI, 0.6–50; I 2 = 94%; p = 0.04), improved QoL with greater reduction in MLHFQ scores (MD 9.03; 95% CI, 2.5–15.6; I 2 = 47%; p = 0.007), and significantly reduced mid-term mortality (relative risk 0.52; 95% CI, 0.4–0.8; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.001). Freedom from AF after ≥1 procedure was 71%; major complications occurred in 8% of patients. Conclusion: Catheter ablation is superior to medical therapy for AF in patients with heart failure resulting in greater improvement in LVEF, quality of life and functional status, with a survival benefit.

LanguageEnglish
Pages707-718
Number of pages12
JournalHeart Lung and Circulation
Volume28
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2019

Keywords

  • Atrial fibrillation
  • Catheter ablation
  • Medical therapy
  • Mortality
  • Quality of life
  • Randomised controlled trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Virk, Sohaib A. ; Bennett, Richard G. ; Chow, Clara ; Sanders, Prash ; Kalman, Jonathan M. ; Thomas, Stuart ; Kumar, Saurabh. / Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure : A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. In: Heart Lung and Circulation. 2019 ; Vol. 28, No. 5. pp. 707-718.
@article{0038c11b13e94953982d4d7f90b5e2ab,
title = "Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials",
abstract = "Background: Catheter ablation (CA) is highly efficacious for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) but data predominantly comes from patients with preserved ventricular function. We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing CA versus medical therapy for AF associated with heart failure (HF). Methods: Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for RCTs reporting clinical outcomes of CA versus medical therapy for AF in HF patients with ≥6 months’ follow-up (atrioventricular-node ablation/device therapy studies excluded). Primary endpoint was change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Secondary endpoints were 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance, quality of life (QoL; measured by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire [MLHFQ]), peri-procedural mortality, major peri-procedural complications and mid-term (≥1-year) survival. Results: Six RCTs (n = 772 patients; mean age 62 ± 11 years, LVEF 30 ± 9{\%}) were included. Catheter ablation, compared to medical therapy was associated with: greater improvement in LVEF (mean difference [MD] 5.67{\%}; 95{\%} Confidence Interval [CI], 3–8; I 2 = 87{\%}; p < 0.001), greater increase in 6MWT distance (MD 25.1 metres; 95{\%} CI, 0.6–50; I 2 = 94{\%}; p = 0.04), improved QoL with greater reduction in MLHFQ scores (MD 9.03; 95{\%} CI, 2.5–15.6; I 2 = 47{\%}; p = 0.007), and significantly reduced mid-term mortality (relative risk 0.52; 95{\%} CI, 0.4–0.8; I 2 = 0{\%}; p = 0.001). Freedom from AF after ≥1 procedure was 71{\%}; major complications occurred in 8{\%} of patients. Conclusion: Catheter ablation is superior to medical therapy for AF in patients with heart failure resulting in greater improvement in LVEF, quality of life and functional status, with a survival benefit.",
keywords = "Atrial fibrillation, Catheter ablation, Medical therapy, Mortality, Quality of life, Randomised controlled trials",
author = "Virk, {Sohaib A.} and Bennett, {Richard G.} and Clara Chow and Prash Sanders and Kalman, {Jonathan M.} and Stuart Thomas and Saurabh Kumar",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.hlc.2018.10.022",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "707--718",
journal = "Heart, lung & circulation",
issn = "1443-9506",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure : A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. / Virk, Sohaib A.; Bennett, Richard G.; Chow, Clara; Sanders, Prash; Kalman, Jonathan M.; Thomas, Stuart; Kumar, Saurabh.

In: Heart Lung and Circulation, Vol. 28, No. 5, 01.05.2019, p. 707-718.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure

T2 - Heart, lung & circulation

AU - Virk, Sohaib A.

AU - Bennett, Richard G.

AU - Chow, Clara

AU - Sanders, Prash

AU - Kalman, Jonathan M.

AU - Thomas, Stuart

AU - Kumar, Saurabh

PY - 2019/5/1

Y1 - 2019/5/1

N2 - Background: Catheter ablation (CA) is highly efficacious for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) but data predominantly comes from patients with preserved ventricular function. We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing CA versus medical therapy for AF associated with heart failure (HF). Methods: Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for RCTs reporting clinical outcomes of CA versus medical therapy for AF in HF patients with ≥6 months’ follow-up (atrioventricular-node ablation/device therapy studies excluded). Primary endpoint was change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Secondary endpoints were 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance, quality of life (QoL; measured by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire [MLHFQ]), peri-procedural mortality, major peri-procedural complications and mid-term (≥1-year) survival. Results: Six RCTs (n = 772 patients; mean age 62 ± 11 years, LVEF 30 ± 9%) were included. Catheter ablation, compared to medical therapy was associated with: greater improvement in LVEF (mean difference [MD] 5.67%; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 3–8; I 2 = 87%; p < 0.001), greater increase in 6MWT distance (MD 25.1 metres; 95% CI, 0.6–50; I 2 = 94%; p = 0.04), improved QoL with greater reduction in MLHFQ scores (MD 9.03; 95% CI, 2.5–15.6; I 2 = 47%; p = 0.007), and significantly reduced mid-term mortality (relative risk 0.52; 95% CI, 0.4–0.8; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.001). Freedom from AF after ≥1 procedure was 71%; major complications occurred in 8% of patients. Conclusion: Catheter ablation is superior to medical therapy for AF in patients with heart failure resulting in greater improvement in LVEF, quality of life and functional status, with a survival benefit.

AB - Background: Catheter ablation (CA) is highly efficacious for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) but data predominantly comes from patients with preserved ventricular function. We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing CA versus medical therapy for AF associated with heart failure (HF). Methods: Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for RCTs reporting clinical outcomes of CA versus medical therapy for AF in HF patients with ≥6 months’ follow-up (atrioventricular-node ablation/device therapy studies excluded). Primary endpoint was change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Secondary endpoints were 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance, quality of life (QoL; measured by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire [MLHFQ]), peri-procedural mortality, major peri-procedural complications and mid-term (≥1-year) survival. Results: Six RCTs (n = 772 patients; mean age 62 ± 11 years, LVEF 30 ± 9%) were included. Catheter ablation, compared to medical therapy was associated with: greater improvement in LVEF (mean difference [MD] 5.67%; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 3–8; I 2 = 87%; p < 0.001), greater increase in 6MWT distance (MD 25.1 metres; 95% CI, 0.6–50; I 2 = 94%; p = 0.04), improved QoL with greater reduction in MLHFQ scores (MD 9.03; 95% CI, 2.5–15.6; I 2 = 47%; p = 0.007), and significantly reduced mid-term mortality (relative risk 0.52; 95% CI, 0.4–0.8; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.001). Freedom from AF after ≥1 procedure was 71%; major complications occurred in 8% of patients. Conclusion: Catheter ablation is superior to medical therapy for AF in patients with heart failure resulting in greater improvement in LVEF, quality of life and functional status, with a survival benefit.

KW - Atrial fibrillation

KW - Catheter ablation

KW - Medical therapy

KW - Mortality

KW - Quality of life

KW - Randomised controlled trials

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057481400&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.hlc.2018.10.022

DO - 10.1016/j.hlc.2018.10.022

M3 - Article

VL - 28

SP - 707

EP - 718

JO - Heart, lung & circulation

JF - Heart, lung & circulation

SN - 1443-9506

IS - 5

ER -