Unidade de Arritmia, Instituto do Coração (InCor), Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP - Brasil.
Arq Bras Cardiol. 2024 Jun;121(6):e20230684. doi: 10.36660/abc.20230684.
There are no randomized studies comparing the maintenance of sinus rhythm after catheter ablation (CA) concerning treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs (AA) in elderly patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF).
To compare the clinical results of pulmonary vein (PV) isolation with the second-generation PVAC Gold catheter against AA treatment in elderly people with recurrent symptomatic paroxysmal AF, refractory to at least one AA, and without structural heart disease.
Sixty patients with paroxysmal AF ≥ 65 years old were randomized to two forms of treatment: group 1: CA and group 2: AA drugs. The primary outcome was the AF recurrence-free rate after at least one year of follow-up. Secondary outcomes were: progression to persistent forms of AF, impact on quality of life (QOLF), and complications. The significance level adopted in the statistical analysis was 5% (p<0.05).
The AF recurrence-free rate was 80% (10% with amiodarone) in the CA group, after 1.3 procedures per patient and 65% in the AA group (60% with amiodarone), (p = 0.119) in an average follow-up of 719 days (Q1: 566; Q3: 730). The persistent AF free rate was 83.4% in the AC group and 67.7% in the AA group (p = 0.073) Both strategies showed an improvement in the AFQoL score during follow-up (p < 0.001), with no difference between the groups. Although without clinical repercussions or impact on the intellectual assessment test, 25% of patients in the CA group showed signs of cerebral embolization on brain MRI.
Both strategies for maintaining sinus rhythm promoted an improvement in the quality of life of elderly patients with symptomatic AF, with no statistical difference in the clinical outcomes. Additional studies using technologies with a better safety profile are needed to evaluate the benefits of CA in elderly patients with AF.
在阵发性心房颤动(AF)的老年患者中,导管消融(CA)后维持窦律与抗心律失常药物(AA)治疗相比,尚无随机研究。
比较第二代 PVAC Gold 导管肺静脉(PV)隔离与 AA 治疗在至少一种 AA 无效且无结构性心脏病的复发性有症状阵发性 AF 的老年人中的临床结果。
60 例阵发性 AF≥65 岁的患者被随机分为两组治疗:组 1:CA;组 2:AA 药物。主要结局是至少一年随访后 AF 无复发率。次要结局是:进展为持续性 AF、对生活质量(QOLF)的影响和并发症。统计分析采用的显著性水平为 5%(p<0.05)。
CA 组 AF 无复发率为 80%(10%用胺碘酮),每例患者进行 1.3 次手术,AA 组为 65%(60%用胺碘酮),(p=0.119)平均随访 719 天(Q1:566;Q3:730)。AC 组持续性 AF 无复发率为 83.4%,AA 组为 67.7%(p=0.073)。两种策略在随访过程中均提高了 AFQoL 评分(p<0.001),组间无差异。尽管没有临床影响或对智力评估测试没有影响,但 CA 组 25%的患者在脑 MRI 上显示出脑栓塞的迹象。
维持窦性节律的两种策略都改善了有症状 AF 老年患者的生活质量,临床结局无统计学差异。需要使用安全性更好的技术进行进一步的研究,以评估 CA 在 AF 老年患者中的益处。