Outcomes of catheter ablation vs.medical treatment for atrial fibrillation and heart failure: a meta-analysis.

Abstract

The benefit of catheter ablation vs. medical treatment has been reported to be inconsistent in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) due to different enrollment criteria. This meta-analysis aimed to decipher the differential outcomes stratified by different left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs) and AF types. We searched PubMed, Embase, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, ClinicalKey, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for RCTs comparing medical treatment and catheter ablation in patients with AF and HF published before March 31, 2023. Nine studies were included. When patients were stratified by LVEF, improved LVEF and 6-min walk distance, less AF recurrence, and lower all-cause mortality in favor of catheter ablation were observed in patients with LVEF ≤50% but not in patients with LVEF ≤35%, and short HF hospitalization was observed in patients with LVEF ≤50% and LVEF ≤35%. When patients were stratified by AF types, improved LVEF and 6-min walk distance, better HF questionnaire score, and short HF hospitalization in favor of catheter ablation were observed both in patients with nonparoxysmal AF and mixed AF (paroxysmal and persistent) and less AF recurrence and lower all-cause mortality in favor of catheter ablation were observed in only patients with mixed AF. This meta-analysis showed improved LVEF and 6-min walk distance, less AF recurrence, and lower all-cause mortality in favor of catheter ablation vs. medical treatment in AF patients with HF and LVEF of 36%-50%. Compared with medical treatment, catheter ablation improved LVEF and had better HF status in patients with nonparoxysmal AF and mixed AF; however, AF recurrence and all-cause mortality in favor of catheter ablation were observed in only HF patients with mixed AF.