Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation can improve left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and renal function and can even reduce mortality in patients with impaired LVEF. However, the effect of post-ablation cardiorenal dysfunction on the prognosis of patients with impaired LVEF who underwent AF ablation remains unclear. Of the 1243 consecutive patients undergoing AF ablation, the prognosis of 163 non-dialysis patients who underwent AF ablation with < 50% LVEF was evaluated. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and a need for modification of the treatment for heart failure. During the median follow-up of 4.2years after the first AF ablation procedure, the primary outcome occurred in 30 of 163 patients (18%). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated that the post-LVEF (LVEF within 1year after the procedure, and before the occurrence of primary outcome) had larger areas under the curve (0.70) than the pre-LVEF (LVEF before the procedure), and the most optimal cutoff value was LVEF ≤ 42%. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients with post-LVEF ≤ 42% and worsening renal function (WRF; an absolute increase in serum creatinine [SCr] ≥ 0.3mg/dL compared with the SCr at baseline within 1year after the procedure and before the occurrence of primary outcome) had a 3.4- to 4.3-fold and 3.4- to 3.7-fold higher risk of the primary outcome compared with those without these predictors, respectively. Patients were categorized using post-LVEF ≤ 42% and WRF as follows: group 1 (post-LVEF > 42% without WRF), group 2 (post-LVEF ≤ 42% without WRF), group 3 (post-LVEF > 42% with WRF), and group 4 (post-LVEF ≤ 42% with WRF). Group 4 had a 15.8-fold (P = 0.0001) higher risk of the primary outcome compared with group 1 after adjusting for pre-procedural factors. In patients with impaired LVEF undergoing AF ablation, post-LVEF ≤ 42% and WRF were independent predictors of poor prognosis. The combination of post-LVEF ≤ 42% and WRF is strongly associated with a poor prognosis in patients with AF undergoing ablation, who with these post-ablation cardiorenal dysfunction may have to be treated more intensively after AF ablation.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call