BACKGROUND Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is recognized as a potentially curative treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). Ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAEs) in addition to PVI has been advocated as a means to improve procedural outcomes, but the benefit remains unclear. OBJECTIVE To synthesize the available data testing the incremental benefit of adding CFAE ablation to PVI. METHODS We performed a meta-analysis of controlled studies comparing the effect of PVI with CFAE ablation versus PVI alone in patients with paroxysmal and nonparoxysmal AF. RESULTS Of the 481 reports identified, 8 studies met our inclusion criteria. There was a statistically significant increase in freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) with the addition of CFAE ablation (RR 1.15, p=0.03). In the 5 reports of nonparoxsymal AF (3 randomized controlled trials, one controlled clinical trial, and one trial using matched historical controls), addition of CFAE ablation resulted in a statistically significant increase in freedom from AT (n=112/181 [62%] for PVI+CFAE versus n=84/179 [47%] for PVI alone; RR 1.32, p=0.02). In trials of paroxysmal AF (3 randomized controlled trials and one trial using matched historical controls), addition of CFAE ablation did not result in a statistically significant increase in freedom from AT (n=131/166 [79%] for PVI+CFAE versus n=122/164 [74%] for PVI alone; RR 1.04, p=0.52). CONCLUSIONS In these studies of patients with nonparoxysmal AF, addition of CFAE ablation to PVI results in greater improvement in freedom from AF. No additional benefit of this combined approach was observed in patients with paroxysmal AF.
Background Direct‐acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) dosing guidelines for atrial fibrillation recommend dose alteration based on age, renal function, body weight, and drug‐drug interactions. There is paucity of data describing the frequency and factors associated with prescription of potentially inappropriate doses. Methods and Results In the ongoing SAGE‐AF (Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Elements in Atrial Fibrillation) study, we performed geriatric assessments (frailty, cognitive impairment, sensory impairments, social isolation, and depression) for participants with atrial fibrillation (age ≥65 years, CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≥2, no anticoagulant contraindications). We developed an algorithm to analyze DOAC dose appropriateness accounting for drug‐drug interactions, age, renal function, and body weight. We also examined whether geriatric impairments were related to inappropriate dosing. Of 1064 patients prescribed anticoagulants, 460 received a DOAC. Participants were aged 74±7 years, 49% were women, and 82% were white. A quarter (23%; n=105) of participants received inappropriate DOAC dose, of whom 82 (78%) were underdosed and 23 (22%) were overdosed. Among participants receiving an inappropriate dose, 12 (11%) were identified using the drug‐drug interactions criteria and would have otherwise been misclassified. In multivariable regression analyses, older age, higher CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score, and history of renal failure were associated with inappropriate DOAC dosing ( P <0.05). Geriatric conditions were not associated with inappropriate dosing. Conclusions In this cohort, over 20% of older patients with atrial fibrillation treated with DOACs were prescribed an inappropriate dose, with most being underdosed. Drug‐drug interactions were common. Factors that influence prescription of guideline‐nonadherent doses may be perception of higher bleeding risk or presence of renal failure in addition to lack of familiarity with dosing guidelines.
In this study of hospital admissions for delivery in California, CHD was associated with incident CHF, atrial arrhythmias, and fetal growth restriction and complex CHD was associated with ventricular arrhythmias and maternal in-hospital mortality, although these outcomes were rare, even in women with complex CHD. These findings may guide monitoring decisions and risk assessment for pregnant women with CHD at the time of delivery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.