Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology
-
Multicenter Study
Does catheter ablation cure atrial fibrillation? Single-procedure outcome of drug-refractory atrial fibrillation ablation: a 6-year multicentre experience.
Aims In the last decade, several approaches to ablating triggers and substrates of atrial fibrillation (AF) have been developed. However, most studies have reported data only on short- or medium-term follow-up. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the 1-year efficacy of catheter ablation for AF is predictive of long-term clinical success. ⋯ The actuarial atrial arrhythmia recurrence rate was 13.0% at 2 years, 21.8% at 3 years, 35.0% at 4 years, 46.8% at 5 years, and 54.6% at 6 years. Atrial arrhythmia-free survival was similar in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF, with and without antiarrhythmic drugs during the follow-up, who underwent electrophysiologically guided pulmonary vein (PV) isolation or anatomical PV ablation. Conclusion Even patients in whom catheter ablation prevents AF recurrence for 1 year should not be considered 'cured', since >40% of them will suffer AF recurrence over a long-term clinical follow-up.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Reduction of ventricular tachyarrhythmia by treatment of atrial fibrillation in ICD patients with dual-chamber implantable cardioverter/defibrillators capable of atrial therapy delivery: the REVERT-AF Study.
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, multicentre study was to investigate whether the incidence of ventricular tachyarrhythmia can be reduced in standard implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) patients by implanting a dual-chamber ICD capable of atrial therapy delivery. ⋯ For patients with standard indications for ICD therapy and no indication for cardiac pacing, a dual-chamber ICD capable of atrial tachyarrhythmia treatment offers no benefit concerning a reduction of ventricular tachyarrhythmias.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
The Midlands Trial of Empirical Amiodarone versus Electrophysiology-guided Interventions and Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillators (MAVERIC): a multi-centre prospective randomised clinical trial on the secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death.
MAVERIC was a randomised clinical trial designed to test the possibility of prospectively identifying patients who would benefit most from the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) by electrophysiology (EP) study in the context of secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) through comparing EP-guided interventions (anti-arrhythmic drugs, coronary revascularization, and ICD) against empirical amiodarone therapy. ⋯ Prospective selection of patients to receive the ICD by EP study did not improve survival compared with empirical amiodarone therapy among survivors of VT, VF or SCD, whereas ICD implantation improved survival regardless of allocated treatment. On this basis, routine EP study has no role in the management of such patients, who should be offered empirical ICD therapy according to the results of other secondary prevention ICD trials.
-
To evaluate the incidence and the strategy of management of syncope admitted urgently to a general hospital. ⋯ Great inter-hospital and inter-department heterogeneity in the incidence and management of syncope was observed in general hospitals. As a consequence, we were unable to describe a uniform strategy for the management of syncope in everyday practice.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Clinical Trial
Prospective, randomized study of atrioventricular ablation and mode-switching, dual chamber pacemaker implantation versus medical therapy in drug-resistant paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. The PAF study. Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.
We performed a prospective randomized 6-month evaluation of the clinical effects of atrioventricular junctional ablation together with placement of a DDDR mode-switching pacemaker vs pharmacological treatment in 43 patients with intolerable paroxysmal atrial fibrillation not controlled with antiarrhythmic drugs. Ablation and pacemaker treatment were highly effective and superior to drug therapy in controlling symptoms and improving quality of life. However, discontinuation of drug therapy exposed patients to further recurrences of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and the risk of developing permanent atrial fibrillation.