ABSTRACT
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent persistent cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with an increased mortality. Therefore, an effective differential treatment of patients is mandatory. After a risk stratification oral anticoagulation (OAC) should be initiated depending on the individual stroke risk of each patient. Alternatively, in the presence of contraindications for OAC and an increased risk for bleeding and/or stroke, the implantation of a left atrial appendage closure device can be considered. Symptomatic patients should undergo a rhythm control strategy if possible. Based on the risk-benefit considerations, catheter ablation (CA) of AF plays an increasingly important role in establishing long-term medicinal rhythm control. A pulmonary vein isolation can lead to freedom from AF for 1 year in 70-80% of patients with paroxysmal AF (and approximately 50% in persistent AF). So far, a survival advantage of CA could only be shown in patients with heart failure, so that in most cases this is only a symptomatic treatment for improvement in the quality of life.
Subject(s)
Atrial Appendage , Atrial Fibrillation , Catheter Ablation , Pulmonary Veins , Atrial Appendage/surgery , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , Humans , Quality of Life , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The use of non-vitamin K antagonists (NOACs), uninterrupted (uVKA) and interrupted vitamin K antagonists (iVKA) are common periprocedural oral anticoagulation (OAC) strategies for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Comparative data on complication rates resulting from OAC strategies for solely persistent AF (persAF) undergoing ablation are sparse. Thus, we sought to determine the impact of these OAC strategies on complication rates among patients with persAF undergoing catheter ablation. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing persAF ablation were included. Depending on preprocedural OAC, three groups were defined: (1) NOACs (paused 48 h preablation), (2) uVKA, and (3) iVKA with heparin bridging. A combined complication endpoint (CCE) composed of bleeding and thromboembolic events was analyzed. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2014, 1440 persAF ablation procedures were performed in 1092 patients. NOACs were given in 441 procedures (31 %; rivaroxaban 57 %, dabigatran 33 %, and apixaban 10 %), uVKA in 488 (34 %), and iVKA in 511 (35 %). Adjusted CCE rates were 5.5 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) (3.1-7.8)] in group 1 (NOACs), 7.5 % [95 % CI (5.0-10.1)] in group 2 (uVKA), and 9.9 % [95 % CI (6.6-13.2)] in group 3. Compared to group 1, the combined complication risk was almost twice as high in group 3 [odd's ratio (OR) 1.9, 95 % CI (1.0-3.7), p = 0.049)]. The major complication rate was low (0.9 %). Bleeding complications, driven by minor groin complications, are more frequent than thromboembolic events (n = 112 vs. 1, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing persAF ablation with iVKA anticoagulation have an increased risk of complications compared to NOACs. Major complications, such as thromboembolic events, are generally rare and are exceeded by minor bleedings.
