Suppr超能文献

单纯导管消融与导管消融联合经皮左心耳封堵治疗心房颤动:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

Catheter ablation alone versus catheter ablation with combined percutaneous left atrial appendage closure for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Junarta Joey, Siddiqui Muhammad U, Abaza Ehab, Zhang Peter, Roshandel Aarash, Barbhaiya Chirag R, Jankelson Lior, Park David S, Holmes Douglas, Chinitz Larry A, Aizer Anthony

机构信息

Leon H. Charney Division of Cardiology, New York University Langone Health, 550 1st Ave, New York, New York, 10016, USA.

Jefferson Heart Institute, Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals, Philadelphia, USA.

出版信息

J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2024 Dec;67(9):2147-2158. doi: 10.1007/s10840-024-01915-7. Epub 2024 Sep 4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Combined catheter ablation (CA) with percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) may produce comprehensive treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) whereby rhythm control is achieved and stroke risk is reduced without the need for chronic oral anticoagulation. However, the efficacy and safety of this strategy is still controversial.

METHODS

This meta-analysis was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. The risk of bias was assessed using the Modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Cochrane risk of bias tool. Eligible studies reported outcomes in patients with AF who underwent combined CA and LAAC vs CA alone. Studies performing CA without pulmonary vein isolation were excluded.

RESULTS

Eight studies comprising 1878 patients were included (2 RCT, 6 observational). When comparing combined CA and LAAC vs CA alone, pooled results showed no difference in arrhythmia recurrence (risk ratio (RR) 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-1.33), stroke or systemic embolism (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.27-2.22), or major periprocedural complications (RR 1.28; 95% CI 0.28-5.89). Total procedure time was shorter with CA alone (mean difference 48.45 min; 95% CI 23.06-74.62).

CONCLUSION

Combined CA with LAAC for AF is associated with similar rates of arrhythmia-free survival, stroke, and major periprocedural complications when compared to CA alone. A combined strategy may be as safe and efficacious for patients at moderate to high risk for bleeding events to negate the need for chronic oral anticoagulation.

摘要

背景

导管消融(CA)联合经皮左心耳封堵术(LAAC)可对心房颤动(AF)进行综合治疗,从而实现节律控制并降低卒中风险,且无需长期口服抗凝药。然而,该策略的有效性和安全性仍存在争议。

方法

本荟萃分析按照系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南进行报告。系统检索了Medline、Scopus和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库以识别相关研究。使用改良的纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表和Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险。纳入的合格研究报告了接受CA联合LAAC与单纯CA治疗的AF患者的结局。未进行肺静脉隔离的CA研究被排除。

结果

纳入了8项研究,共1878例患者(2项随机对照试验,6项观察性研究)。比较CA联合LAAC与单纯CA时,汇总结果显示心律失常复发(风险比(RR)1.04;95%置信区间(CI)0.82 - 1.33)、卒中或全身性栓塞(RR 0.78;95% CI 0.27 - 2.22)或主要围手术期并发症(RR 1.28;95% CI 0.28 - 5.89)方面无差异。单纯CA的总手术时间更短(平均差48.45分钟;95% CI 23.06 - 74.62)。

结论

与单纯CA相比,AF患者CA联合LAAC的无心律失常生存率、卒中及主要围手术期并发症发生率相似。对于出血事件中、高风险患者,联合策略可能同样安全有效,无需长期口服抗凝药。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验