An evaluation of the strategy of maintenance of sinus rhythm by antiarrhythmic drug therapy after ablation and pacing therapy in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with recurrent persistent atrial fibrillation. Atrial fibrillation: the rate versus rhythm management controversy. Catheter ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drug treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation: a multicentre, randomized, controlled trial (SARA study) Comparison of catheter ablation and surgical ablation in patients with long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation and rheumatic heart disease: a four-year follow-up study. Catheter ablation treatment in patients with drug-refractory atrial fibrillation: a prospective, multi-centre, randomized, controlled study (Catheter Ablation For The Cure Of Atrial Fibrillation Study). Efficacy of three different ablative procedures to treat atrial fibrillation in patients with valvular heart disease: a randomised trial. Randomized trial of rate-control versus rhythm-control in persistent atrial fibrillation: the Strategies of Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (STAF) study. Maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation: an AFFIRM substudy of the first antiarrhythmic drug. Ablation for longstanding permanent atrial fibrillation: results from a randomized study comparing three different strategies. Radiofrequency ablation vs antiarrhythmic drugs as first-line treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (RAAFT-2): a randomized trial. Rate control vs rhythm control in patients with nonvalvular persistent atrial fibrillation: the results of the Polish How to Treat Chronic Atrial Fibrillation (HOT CAFE) Study. Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation and Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy: A Prospective, Randomized, 4-Year Follow-Up Trial: The APAF Study Atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure: Role of catheter ablation therapies. Long-Term Clinical Results of 2 Different Ablation Strategies in Patients With Paroxysmal and Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Antiarrhythmic drug therapy after radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation. Cardiac rate normalization in chronic atrial fibrillation: comparison of long-term efficacy of treatment with amiodarone versus AV node ablation and permanent His-bundle pacing.
AIMS Permanent atrial fibrillation develops in many patients after ablation and pacing therapy .  We compared a strategy that initially allowed patients to remain in atrial fibrillation with a strategy that initially attempted to restore and maintain sinus rhythm . METHODS AND RESULTS In this multicentre r and omized controlled trial , 68 patients affected by severely symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were assigned , after successful atrioventricular junction ablation and pacing treatment  , to antiarrhythmic drug therapy with amiodarone , propafenone , flecainide or sotalol and were compared with 69 patients assigned , after successful AV junction ablation and pacing treatment , to no antiarrhythmic drug therapy . The patients were followed-up for 12 to 24 months ( mean 16+/-4 ) . The drug arm patients had a 57 % reduction in the risk of developing permanent atrial fibrillation ( 21 % vs 37 % , P=0.02 ) . Evaluation after 12 months revealed similar quality of life scores and echocardiographic parameters in the two groups , but the drug arm patients had more episodes of heart failure and hospitalizations ( P=0.05 ) . The outcome was similar between the 40 patients who developed permanent atrial fibrillation and the 97 who did not . CONCLUSION Conventional antiarrhythmic therapy reduces the risk of development of permanent atrial fibrillation after ablation and pacing therapy . The present data do not support the concept that the development of permanent atrial fibrillation is related to an adverse outcome when a perfect control of heart rate is obtained by ablation and pacing BACKGROUND Maintenance of sinus rhythm is the main therapeutic goal in patients with atrial fibrillation . However , recurrences of atrial fibrillation and side effects of antiarrhythmic drugs offset the benefits of sinus rhythm . We hypothesized that ventricular rate control is not inferior to the maintenance of sinus rhythm for the treatment of atrial fibrillation . METHODS We r and omly assigned 522 patients who had persistent atrial fibrillation after a previous electrical cardioversion to receive treatment aim ed at rate control or rhythm control . Patients in the rate-control group received oral anticoagulant drugs and rate-slowing medication . Patients in the rhythm-control group underwent serial cardioversions and received antiarrhythmic drugs and oral anticoagulant drugs . The end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes , heart failure , thromboembolic complications , bleeding , implantation of a pacemaker , and severe adverse effects of drugs . RESULTS After a mean ( + /-SD ) of 2.3+/-0.6 years , 39 percent of the 266 patients in the rhythm-control group had sinus rhythm , as compared with 10 percent of the 256 patients in the rate-control group . The primary end point occurred in 44 patients ( 17.2 percent ) in the rate-control group and in 60 ( 22.6 percent ) in the rhythm-control group . The 90 percent ( two-sided ) upper boundary of the absolute difference in the primary end point was 0.4 percent ( the prespecified criterion for noninferiority was 10 percent or less ) . The distribution of the various components of the primary end point was similar in the rate-control and rhythm-control groups . CONCLUSIONS Rate control is not inferior to rhythm control for the prevention of death and morbidity from cardiovascular causes and may be appropriate therapy in patients with a recurrence of persistent atrial fibrillation after electrical cardioversion The fundamental management strategy for atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is still debated . There is no doubt that those patients at risk of thromboembolic events should be offered anticoagulant therapy . However , it is uncertain whether rhythm control ( restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm ) or rate control ( adjustment to a physiological ventricular rate while allowing AF to continue ) is the preferred primary treatment option for the reduction of symptoms and major cardiovascular ( CV ) outcomes associated with AF . Several well conducted trials comparing the two strategies led to the conclusion that there was little to choose between them . However , guidelines leaned towards recommending rate control as the initial strategy , and reserved rhythm control for those who remained symptomatic . Recently this status quo is being increasingly challenged by the clear demonstration that left atrial catheter ablation is effective at suppressing AF resistant to traditional antiarrhythmic drugs , such as those that failed to demonstrate any superiority when compared with rate control . Also , recently introduced antiarrhythmic therapy may have superior efficacy with regard to reducing unexpected CV hospitalization , CV mortality and stroke . In addition , there is a growing perception that atrial remodelling should be best prevented by early rhythm control rather than delaying until rate control has proven unsatisfactory . For these reasons the results of large r and omised clinical trials , which recruit patients soon after the presentation of AF and compare ' aggressive ' modern rhythm control against the guideline approach of primary rate control , are eagerly awaited . In the meantime the pendulum of clinical opinion has begun to swing towards a rhythm control strategy Background Catheter ablation ( CA ) is a highly effective therapy for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ( AF ) when compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy ( ADT ) . No r and omized studies have compared the two strategies in persistent AF . The present r and omized trial aim ed to compare the effectiveness of CA vs. ADT in treating persistent AF . Methods and results Patients with persistent AF were r and omly assigned to CA or ADT ( excluding patients with long-st and ing persistent AF ) . Primary endpoint at 12-month follow-up was defined as any episode of AF or atrial flutter lasting > 24 h that occurred after a 3-month blanking period . Secondary endpoints were any atrial tachyarrhythmia lasting > 30 s , hospitalization , and electrical cardioversion . In total , 146 patients were included ( aged 55 ± 9 years , 77 % male ) . The ADT group received class Ic ( 43.8 % ) or class III drugs ( 56.3 % ) . In an intention-to-treat analysis , 69 of 98 patients ( 70.4 % ) in the CA group and 21 of 48 patients ( 43.7 % ) in the ADT group were free of the primary endpoint ( P = 0.002 ) , implying an absolute risk difference of 26.6 % ( 95 % CI 10.0–43.3 ) in favour of CA . The proportion of patients free of any recurrence ( > 30 s ) was higher in the CA group than in the ADT group ( 60.2 vs. 29.2 % ; P < 0.001 ) and cardioversion was less frequent ( 34.7 vs. 50 % , respectively ; P = 0.018 ) . Conclusion Catheter ablation is superior to medical therapy for the maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with persistent AF at 12-month follow-up . Clinical Trial Registration Information NCT00863213 ( http:// clinical trials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00863213 ) BACKGROUND In our previous prospect i ve and r and omized study , we have demonstrated that the concomitant surgical ablation using saline-irrigated cooled tip radiofrequency ablation ( SICTRA ) system is more effective than subsequent circumferential pulmonary vein isolation ( CPVI ) combined with substrate modification in treating patients with long-st and ing persistent atrial fibrillation ( LS-AF ) and rheumatic heart disease ( RHD ) undergoing cardiac surgery during middle-term follow-up . Whether this strategy also decreases longer-term arrhythmia recurrence is unknown . This study describes the 4-year efficacy of SICTRA for these patients . Furthermore , we seek to compare the electrophysiological characteristics for recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia ( ATa ) at the session of catheter ablation between two groups . METHODS Long-term follow-up was performed in 95 patients who underwent the catheter ablation strategy ( n=47 , Group A ) or SICTRA ( n=48 , Group B ) combined with valvular surgery for symptomatic LS-AF patients with RHD . RESULTS After one procedure , Group B had a significantly higher freedom from ATa compared with Group A ( 29/48 vs 15/47 , P=0.005 ) after a mean follow-up of 54 months ( range 48 to 63 months ) . Catheter-based mapping and ablation of recurrent ATa showed larger amounts of macro-reentrant atrial tachycardias ( ATs ) in Group B and higher incidence of pulmonary vein ( PV ) recovery in Group A. After multiple catheter ablations for recurrent ATa , sinus rhythm ( SR ) could be maintained equally between two groups . CONCLUSIONS Single procedure success seems to be higher with SICTRA but repeated catheter ablation potentially results in comparable outcomes in treating patients with LS-AF and RHD during long-term follow-up . More macro-reentrant ATs and more PV recoveries are identified to be responsible for ATa in SICTRA and catheter ablation group , respectively AIMS We conducted a multi-centre , prospect i ve , controlled , r and omized trial to investigate the adjunctive role of ablation therapy to antiarrhythmic drug therapy in preventing  atrial fibrillation ( AF )  relapses in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF in whom antiarrhythmic drug therapy had already failed . METHODS AND RESULTS One hundred and thirty seven patients were r and omized to ablation and antiarrhythmic drug therapy ( ablation group ) or antiarrhythmic drug therapy alone ( control group ) . In the ablation group , patients underwent cavo-tricuspid and left inferior pulmonary vein (PV)-mitral isthmus ablation plus circumferential PV ablation . The primary end-point of the study was the absence of any recurrence of atrial arrhythmia lasting > 30 s in the 1-year follow-up period , after 1-month blanking period . Three ( 4.4 % ) major complications were related to ablation : one patient had a stroke during left atrium ablation , another suffered transient phrenic paralysis , and the third had a pericardial effusion which required pericardiocentesis . After 12 months of follow-up , 63/69 ( 91.3 % ) control group patients had at least one AF recurrence , whereas 30/68 ( 44.1 % ) ( P<0.001 ) ablation group patients had atrial arrhythmia recurrence ( four patients had atrial flutter , 26 patients AF ) . CONCLUSION Ablation therapy combined with antiarrhythmic drug therapy is superior to antiarrhythmic drug therapy alone in preventing atrial arrhythmia recurrences in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF in whom antiarrhythmic drug therapy has already failed OBJECTIVES Various modifications have been proposed to the original Cox 's Maze procedure due to concerns about the long bypass and cross clamp times . The efficacy of these procedures has been studied and reported . We conducted a r and omised prospect i ve study to compare three procedures , differing in extent , of ablation in patients in atrial fibrillation who were undergoing surgery for rheumatic valvular heart disease . These procedures utilised radiofrequency in the bipolar mode . The extent of ablation was ( 1 ) biatrial ( replication of the Cox Maze ) ( 2 ) left atrial portion of the Cox Maze and ( 3 ) pulmonary vein isolation along with a control group ( the No Maze group ) . Conversion rate to sinus rhythm was studied over a mid-term follow-up period . METHODS A total of 160 patients were studied with 40 patients in each group .  Antiarrhythmic drugs were not used in the three months preceding surgery and for seven days postoperatively . The patients underwent surgery for their valve disease along with the ablative procedure as per r and omisation using radiofrequency microbipolar coagulation and cryoablation . They were followed up and were evaluated for symptomatic improvement , rhythm with ECG documentation and 2D echocardiography . RESULTS Follow-up was available for 133 patients . Mid-term results showed that sinus rhythm was restored in 62.5 % patients of Biatrial Maze group and 57.5 % in the Left Atrial Maze . In the Pulmonary Vein Isolation Maze group , 67.5 % patients converted to NSR whereas in the No Maze group only 20 % patients were in sinus rhythm ( p value for all the groups was 0.001 when compared to the No Maze group ) . The incidence of other arrhythmias was not significant and there were no other major complications . All the patients in sinus rhythm at follow-up were in NYHA functional class I-II and showed good effort tolerance . CONCLUSIONS Results achieved with the three ablative procedures are comparable . Therefore lesser procedures viz . Left Atrial Maze and the Pulmonary Vein Isolation Maze procedures must be studied further with the additional use of antiarrhythmic drugs OBJECTIVES This study was design ed to compare two treatment strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation(AF ) :  rhythm-control ( restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm ) and rate-control ( pharmacologic or invasive rate-control and anticoagulation ) . BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia . It is unclear whether a strategy of rhythm- or rate-control is better in terms of mortality , morbidity , and quality of life . METHODS The Strategies of Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation ( STAF ) multicenter pilot trial r and omized 200 patients ( 100 per group ) with persistent AF to rhythm- or rate-control .  The combined primary end point was a combination of death , cardiopulmonary resuscitation , cerebrovascular event , and systemic embolism . RESULTS After 19.6 + /- 8.9 months ( range 0 to 36 months ) there was no difference in the primary end point between rhythm-control ( 9/100 ; 5.54%/year ) and rate-control ( 10/100 ; 6.09%/year ; p = 0.99 ) . The percentage of patients in sinus rhythm in the rhythm-control group after up to four cardioversions during the follow-up period ( rate-control group ) was 23 % ( 0 % ) at 36 months . Eighteen primary end points occurred in atrial fibrillation ; only one occurred in sinus rhythm ( p = 0.049 ) . CONCLUSIONS The STAF pilot study showed no differences between the two treatment strategies in all end points except hospitalizations . These data suggest that there was no benefit in attempting rhythm-control in these patients with a high risk of arrhythmia recurrence . It remains unclear whether the results in the rhythm-control group would have been better if sinus rhythm had been maintained in a higher proportion of patients , as all but one end point occurred during AF OBJECTIVES This study evaluated the efficacy of antiarrhythmic drugs for the treatment of  atrial fibrillation ( AF ) .  BACKGROUND The most effective and safest antiarrhythmic drug for the treatment of AF is unknown . METHODS The Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management ( AFFIRM ) study compared two treatment strategies -- rate control and rhythm control -- in patients with AF and risk factors for stroke or death . This sub study , performed in patients r and omized to rhythm control , compared different antiarrhythmic drugs by r and omly assigning the first drug treatment to : 1 ) amiodarone , 2 ) sotalol , or 3 ) a class I drug . The primary end point was the proportion of patients alive , in sinus rhythm , with no additional cardioversions and still taking the assigned drug at one year . Comparisons were made between patients eligible for each of three drug pairs . RESULTS At one year , in 222 patients r and omized between amiodarone and class I agents , 62 % were successfully treated with amiodarone , compared with 23 % taking class I agents ( p < 0.001 ) . In 256 patients r and omized between amiodarone and sotalol , 60 % versus 38 % were successfully treated , respectively ( p = 0.002 ) . In 183 patients r and omized between sotalol and class I agents , 34 % versus 23 % were successfully treated , respectively ( p = 0.488 ) , although this portion of the sub study was stopped early when amiodarone was shown to be better than class I agents . Sinus rhythm was achieved in nearly 80 % of patients at one-year follow-up with serial therapy . Adverse effects were common . CONCLUSIONS Amiodarone was more effective at one year than either sotalol or class I agents for the strategy of maintenance of sinus rhythm without cardioversion BACKGROUND This prospect i ve multicenter r and omized study aim ed to compare the efficacy of 3 common ablation methods used for longst and ing permanent atrial fibrillation ( AF ) . METHODS A total of 144 patients with longst and ing permanent AF ( median duration 28 months ) were r and omly assigned to circumferential pulmonary vein ablation ( CPVA , group 1 , n = 47 ) , to pulmonary vein antrum isolation ( PVAI , group 2 , n = 48 ) or to a hybrid strategy combining ablation of complex fractionated or rapid atrial electrograms ( CFAE ) in both atria followed by a pulmonary vein antrum isolation ( CFAE + PVAI , group 3 , n = 49 ) . RESULTS Scarring in the left atrium and structural heart disease/hypertension were present in most patients ( 65 % ) . After a mean follow-up of 16 months , 11 % of patients in group 1 , 40 % of patients in group 2 and 61 % of patients in group 3 were in sinus rhythm after one procedure and with no antiarrhythmic drugs ( P < .001 ) . Sinus rhythm maintenance would increase respectively to 28 % ( group 1 ) , 83 % ( group 2 ) , and 94 % ( group 3 ) after 2 procedures and with antiarrhythmic drugs ( AADs , P < .001 ) . The AF terminated during ablation , either by conversion to sinus rhythm or organization into an atrial tachyarrhythmia , in 13 % of patients ( group 1 ) , 44 % ( group 2 ) , and 74 % ( group 3 ) respectively . CFAE alone , performed as the first step of the ablation in group 3 , organized AF in only 1 patient . CONCLUSION In this study , the hybrid AF ablation strategy including antrum isolation and CFAE ablation had the highest likelihood of maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with longst and ing permanent AF . Electrical isolation of the PVs , although inadequate if performed alone , is relevant to achieve long-term sinus rhythm maintenance after ablation . Bi-atrial CFAE ablation had a minimal impact on AF termination during ablation IMPORTANCE Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is the most common rhythm disorder seen in clinical practice . Antiarrhythmic drugs are effective for reduction of recurrence in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF .  Radiofrequency ablation is an accepted therapy in patients for whom antiarrhythmic drugs have failed ; however , its role as a first-line therapy needs further investigation . OBJECTIVE To compare radiofrequency ablation with antiarrhythmic drugs ( st and ard therapy ) in treating patients with paroxysmal AF as a first-line therapy . DESIGN , SETTING , AND PATIENTS A r and omized clinical trial involving 127 treatment-naive patients with paroxysmal AF were r and omized at 16 centers in Europe and North America to received either antiarrhythmic therapy or ablation .  The first patient was enrolled July 27 , 2006 ; the last patient , January 29 , 2010 . The last follow-up was February 16 , 2012 . INTERVENTIONS Sixty-one patients in the antiarrhythmic drug group and 66 in the radiofrequency ablation group were followed up for 24 months . MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The time to the first documented atrial tachyarrhythmia of more than 30 seconds ( symptomatic or asymptomatic AF , atrial flutter , or atrial tachycardia ) , detected by either scheduled or unscheduled electrocardiogram , Holter , transtelephonic monitor , or rhythm strip , was the primary outcome . Secondary outcomes included symptomatic recurrences of atrial tachyarrhythmias and quality of life measures assessed by the EQ-5D tool . RESULTS Forty-four patients ( 72.1 % ) in the antiarrhythmic group and in 36 patients ( 54.5 % ) in the ablation group experienced the primary efficacy outcome ( hazard ratio [ HR ] , 0.56 [ 95 % CI , 0.35 - 0.90 ] ; P = .02 ) . For the secondary outcomes , 59 % in the drug group and 47 % in the ablation group experienced the first recurrence of symptomatic AF , atrial flutter , atrial tachycardia ( HR , 0.56 [ 95 % CI , 0.33 - 0.95 ] ; P = .03 ) . No deaths or strokes were reported in either group ; 4 cases of cardiac tamponade were reported in the ablation group . In the st and ard treatment group , 26 patients ( 43 % ) underwent ablation after 1-year . Quality of life was moderately impaired at baseline in both groups and improved at the 1 year follow-up . However , improvement was not significantly different among groups . CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with paroxysmal AF without previous antiarrhythmic drug treatment , radiofrequency ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drugs result ed in a lower rate of recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias at 2 years . However , recurrence was frequent in both groups . TRIAL REGISTRATION clinical trials.gov Identifier : NCT00392054 STUDY OBJECTIVES The relative risks and benefits of strategies of rate control vs rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation ( AF ) remain to be fully explored . DESIGN The How to Treat Chronic Atrial Fibrillation ( HOT CAFE ) Polish trial was design ed to evaluate in a r and omized , multicenter , and prospect i ve manner the feasibility and long-term outcomes of rate control vs rhythm control strategies in patients with persistent AF . PATIENTS Our study population comprised 205 patients ( 134 men and 71 women ; mean [ + /- SD ] age , 60.8 + /- 11.2 years ) with a mean AF duration of 273.7 + /- 112.4 days . The mean observation period was 1.7 + /- 0.4 years . One hundred one patients were r and omly assigned to the rate control group and received rate-slowing therapy guided by repeated 24-h Holter monitoring . Direct current cardioversion and atrioventricular junctional ablation with pacemaker placement were alternative nonpharmacologic strategies for patients with tachycardia that was resistant to medical therapy . One hundred four patients were r and omized to sinus rhythm restoration and maintenance using serial cardioversion supported by a predefined stepwise antiarrhythmic drug regimen ( ie , disopyramide , propafenone , sotalol , and amiodarone ) . In both groups , thromboembolic prophylaxis followed current guidelines . MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS At the end of follow-up , 63.5 % of patients in the rhythm control arm remained in sinus rhythm . No significant differences in the composite end point ( ie , all-cause mortality , number of thromboembolic events , or major bleeding ) were found between the rate control group and the rhythm control group ( odds ratio , 1.98 ; 95 % confidence interval , 0.28 to 22.3 ; p > 0.71 ) . The incidence of hospital admissions was much lower in the rate control arm ( 12 % vs 74 % , respectively ; p < 0.001 ) . New York Heart Association functional class improved in both study groups , while mean exercise tolerance , as measured by the maximal treadmill workload , improved only in the rhythm control group ( 5.2 + /- 5.1 vs 7.6 + /- 3.3 metabolic equivalents , respectively ; p < 0.001 ) . The rhythm control strategy led to an increased mean left ventricular fractional shortening ( 29 + /- 7 % vs 31 + /- 7 % , respectively ; p < 0.01 ) . One episode of pulmonary embolism occurred in the rate control group despite oral anticoagulation therapy , while three patients in the rhythm control arm of the study experienced ischemic strokes ( not significant ) . CONCLUSIONS The Polish HOT CAFE study revealed no significant differences in major end points between the rate control group and the rhythm control group Background — Information on comparative outcome between radiofrequency catheter ablation ( RFA ) and antiarrhythmic drugs ( AADs ) > 1 year after r and omization is important for clinical decision-making . Methods and Results — A total of 198 patients ( age , 56±10 years ) with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were r and omly assigned to RFA ( 99 patients ) or to AADs ( 99 patients ) . We evaluated efficacy of RFA or AADs in a comparable 48-month follow-up period according to intention-to-treat analysis . Cardiac rhythm was assessed with daily transtelephonic transmissions . Quality of life was also analyzed . At 4 years , among the 99 patients first assigned to RFA , the procedure was repeated because of recurrent atrial fibrillation/atrial tachycardia in 27 patients ( 27.3 % ) . Among the 99 patients r and omly assigned to AADs , 87 ( 87.9 % ) crossed over to undergo RFA and 4 years after r and om assignment only 12 ( 12.1 % ) were in sinus rhythm with AAD alone without ablation . Despite the high level of crossovers , at 4 years the intention-to-treat analysis showed that 72.7 % of patients in the ablation arm and 56.5 % of those initially r and omly assigned to AADs were free of recurrent atrial fibrillation/atrial tachycardia ( P=0.017 ) . During the follow-up , 19.2 % of AAD patients progressed to persistent atrial fibrillation before switching to RFA . RFA significantly improved quality of life ( P<0.001 ) , whereas before crossing over to RFA , patients receiving AADs showed poorer quality of life . Except for new left atrial tachycardia , there were no serious complications caused by RFA . Conclusions — With follow-up extended to 4 years after r and omly assigned , ablation remains superior to antiarrhythmic drug in these patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation . Clinical Trial Registration — URL : http://www . clinical trials.gov . Unique identifier : NCT00340314 Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) represents the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia in patients with heart failure ( HF ) . AF in HF patients is associated with worsening of symptoms and also results in a substantial increase in mortality . Although HF patients in sinus rhythm have a better outcome than patients with AF , several r and omized studies investigating pharmacological rhythm control versus rate control have shown no advantage of one strategy over the other in terms of patient outcomes . Catheter-based ablation therapy is a newer therapeutic option with a rapidly evolving and changing role in the management of this arrhythmia . In the present review , the authors discuss the epidemiology , pathophysiology and prognostic significance of AF in patients with HF . Exclusively addressed are studies investigating catheter-based ablation for rhythm-control and rate-control therapies in the management of AF in HF patients Background — Data regarding the long-term efficacy of atrial fibrillation ( AF ) ablation are still lacking . Methods and Results —Two hundred four consecutive patients symptomatic for paroxysmal or persistent/permanent AF were r and omly assigned to 2 different ablation schemes : pulmonary vein isolation ( PVI ) and PVI plus left linear lesions ( LL ) . Primary end point was to assess the maintenance of sinus rhythm ( SR ) after procedures 1 and 2 in the absence of antiarrhythmic drugs in a long-term follow-up of at least 3 years . Paroxysmal AF — With a single procedure at 12-month follow-up , 46 % of patients treated with PVI maintained SR , whereas at 3-year follow-up , 29 % were in SR ; using the “ PVI plus LL ” at the 12-month follow-up , 57 % of patients were in SR , whereas at the 3-year follow-up , 53 % remained in SR . After a second procedure , the long-term overall success rate without antiarrhythmic drugs was 62 % with PVI and 85 % with PVI plus LL . Persistent/Permanent AF — With a single procedure at the 12-month follow-up , 27 % of patients treated with PVI were in SR , whereas at the 3-year follow-up , 19 % maintained SR ; using the PVI plus LL with a single procedure at the 12-month follow-up 45 % of patients were in SR , whereas at the 3-year follow-up , 41 % remained in SR . After a second procedure , the long-term overall success rate without antiarrhythmic drugs was 39 % with PVI and 75 % with PVI plus LL . Conclusions —A long-term follow-up of AF ablation shows that short-term results can not be considered permanent because AF recurrences are still present after the first year especially in patients who have had “ PVI ” strategy .  PVI isolation plus LL is superior to the PVI strategy in maintaining SR without antiarrhythmic drugs after procedures 1 and 2 both in paroxysmal and persistent AF OBJECTIVES The use of antiarrhythmic drugs after ablation is a controversial issue when evaluating the efficacy of atrial fibrillation ( AF ) ablation . This study compares in a prospect i ve and r and omized fashion the impact of an antiarrhythmic drug in preventing AF recurrence after AF ablation . METHODS From February 2004 to May 2005 , 107 consecutive patients ( mean age 57 + /- 10 years , 69 men ) , with paroxysmal ( 60 % ) or persistent ( 40 % ) drug refractory AF , were r and omly assigned to ablation alone ( Group A , 53 patients ) or combined with the best antiarrhythmic therapy , preferably amiodarone ( Group B , 54 patients ) . All patients underwent cavo-tricuspid and left inferior pulmonary vein (PV)-mitral isthmus ablation plus circumferential PV ablation , using a guided electro-anatomical approach . St and ard electrocardiograms ( ECG ) , and ambulatory and transtelephonic ECG monitoring  were used to assess AF recurrences . Recurrences during the first month after ablation were excluded from this analysis . RESULTS At 12 months of follow-up , no significant difference was observed in the rates of AF recurrences between Group A ( 18/53 patients , 34 % ) and Group B ( 16/54 patients , 30 % ) . The percentage of patients with > /= 1 asymptomatic AF episode was higher in Group B than in Group A ( 10/16 patients , 63 % , vs 5/18 patients , 28 % , P = 0.04 ) . CONCLUSIONS Continuing antiarrhythmic drug therapy in patients who undergo catheter ablation for AF did not lower the rate of AF recurrences . Antiarrhythmic drugs increased the proportion of patients with asymptomatic AF episodes Chronic atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is a common arrhythmia with significant morbidity and mortality . AF has been the subject of considerable attention and intensive clinical research in recent years . Current opinion on the management of AF favors the restoration and maintenance of normal ventricular rhythm . This has several potential benefits , including the alleviation of arrhythmia-associated symptoms and hemodynamic improvements . Maintenance of frequents normalization of ventricular rhythm ( NVR ) can be achieved with antiarrhythmic drug therapy or with AV node radiofrequency ablation ( RFA ) and permanent ventricular pacing . Recent interest has focused on the use of class III antiarrhythmic agents , such as amiodarone hydrochloride . This investigation compared amiodarone to AV node RFA and permanent pacing of the His-bundle area in maintaining NVR in patients with resistant chronic AF . After 12 months of treatment with amiodarone ( 200 to 400 mg/d ) 30 % of patients remained in NVR , 30 % were in transitional phase of improvement , and 40 % showed negative effect . Only a few patients in this group developed ocular or hepatic side effects . On one year follow-up was achieved in 100 % of cases without any clinical ly significant side effects being seen . In conclusion , analysis of the results of this study suggests that low-dose amiodarone is well tolerated in the management of chronic AF in a selected patient population . The more aggressive interventional radiofrequency ablation technique is significantly more effective and more reliable in the long-term clinical treatment of drug-resistant AF
In people with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation , evidence suggests a superiority of RFCA to antiarrhythmic drugs in achieving freedom from atrial arrhythmias , reducing the need for cardioversion , and reducing cardiac-related hospitalisations .
BACKGROUND The optimal rhythm management strategy for people with non-paroxysmal ( persistent or long-st and ing persistent ) atrial fibrilation is currently not well defined .
Antiarrhythmic drugs have been the mainstay of therapy .
But recently , in people who have not responded to antiarrhythmic drugs , the use of ablation ( catheter and surgical ) has emerged as an alternative to maintain sinus rhythm to avoid long-term atrial fibrillation complications .
However , evidence from r and omised trials about the efficacy and safety of ablation in non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation is limited .
OBJECTIVES To determine the efficacy and safety of ablation ( catheter and surgical ) in people with non-paroxysmal ( persistent or long-st and ing persistent ) atrial fibrillation compared to antiarrhythmic drugs .