Department of Medicine, Guthrie Health System/Robert Packer Hospital, Sayre, Pennsylvania.
Department of Medicine, Guthrie Health System/Robert Packer Hospital, Sayre, Pennsylvania.
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018 May;4(5):626-635. doi: 10.1016/j.jacep.2018.03.003. Epub 2018 May 2.
This study sought to compare the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation (CA) with those of medical therapy (MT) for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF).
The preferred therapeutic strategy for subjects with AF remains unclear.
A total of 17 randomized controlled trials were selected using Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (September 1998 to 2 February 2018). The analysis was stratified at the trial level according to the following: 1) patients with AF and heart failure (HF); and 2) patients with AF without HF.
A total of 2,272 patients with AF (775 patients with HF and 1,497 patients without HF) participated in this analysis. In patients with HF, CA was associated with significant relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR]: 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36 to 0.76; p < 0.001; I = 0), recurrent atrial arrhythmia (RR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.61; p <0.001; I = 56), and cardiac hospitalization (RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.87; p = 0.01; I = 43) compared with MT. Conversely, in patients without HF, CA had no beneficial effect on the risk of all-cause mortality compared with MT (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.29 to 2.61; p = 0.81; I = 0). However, CA reduced the risk of recurrent atrial arrhythmia (RR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.52; p < 0.001; I = 73) and cardiac hospitalization (RR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.45; p < 0.001; I = 0) in patients without HF.
This meta-analysis suggests that although CA reduced the risk of cardiac hospitalization and recurrent atrial arrhythmia both in subjects with HF and in subjects without HF, the reduction in all-cause mortality was limited to subjects with HF only.
本研究旨在比较导管消融(CA)与药物治疗(MT)治疗心房颤动(AF)的疗效和安全性。
AF 患者的首选治疗策略仍不明确。
通过 Medline、EMBASE 和 CENTRAL(1998 年 9 月至 2018 年 2 月 2 日)检索,共纳入 17 项随机对照试验。根据以下因素对试验水平进行分层分析:1)AF 合并心力衰竭(HF)患者;2)AF 不合并 HF 患者。
共有 2272 例 AF 患者(775 例 HF 患者和 1497 例 HF 患者)参与了本分析。在 HF 患者中,与 MT 相比,CA 可显著降低全因死亡率(风险比 [RR]:0.52;95%置信区间 [CI]:0.36 至 0.76;p<0.001;I=0)、复发性心房颤动(RR:0.44;95%CI:0.31 至 0.61;p<0.001;I=56)和心脏住院率(RR:0.63;95%CI:0.46 至 0.87;p=0.01;I=43)。相反,在不合并 HF 的患者中,与 MT 相比,CA 对全因死亡率风险无有益影响(RR:0.88,95%CI:0.29 至 2.61;p=0.81;I=0)。然而,CA 降低了不合并 HF 的患者复发性心房颤动(RR:0.40;95%CI:0.31 至 0.52;p<0.001;I=73)和心脏住院率(RR:0.32;95%CI:0.23 至 0.45;p<0.001;I=0)的风险。
本荟萃分析表明,尽管 CA 降低了 HF 患者和非 HF 患者的心脏住院率和复发性心房颤动风险,但全因死亡率的降低仅限于 HF 患者。