Comparative Analysis of Clinical Outcomes of High-power, Short-duration Ablation versus Low-power, Long-duration Ablation Strategy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Comprehensive Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses.

Q3 Medicine
Journal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management Pub Date : 2024-08-15 eCollection Date: 2024-08-01 DOI:10.19102/icrm.2024.15083
Peddi Pavani, Olusegun Abiola Olanrewaju, Raja Subhash Sagar, Monika Bai, Jai Chand, Vishal Bhatia, Fnu Sagar, Fnu Karishma, Hamza Islam, Aman Kumar, Fnu Versha, Rabia Islam, Taha Nadeem
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Clinical Outcomes of High-power, Short-duration Ablation versus Low-power, Long-duration Ablation Strategy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Comprehensive Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses.","authors":"Peddi Pavani, Olusegun Abiola Olanrewaju, Raja Subhash Sagar, Monika Bai, Jai Chand, Vishal Bhatia, Fnu Sagar, Fnu Karishma, Hamza Islam, Aman Kumar, Fnu Versha, Rabia Islam, Taha Nadeem","doi":"10.19102/icrm.2024.15083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects around 33 million people worldwide, rendering it a common cardiac arrhythmia. Catheter ablation (CA) has evolved as a leading therapeutic intervention for symptomatic AF. This umbrella review systematically evaluates existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses to assess the safety, efficacy, and potential of high-power, short-duration (HPSD) ablation as an alternative therapy option for AF. A thorough exploration was undertaken across PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify pertinent studies for inclusion in this umbrella review. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method was employed to assess the overall certainty of the evidence comprehensively, and the quality of the incorporated reviews was meticulously evaluated through use of the AMSTAR 2 tool, the Cochrane Collaboration tool, and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. In this study, we initially identified 35 systematic reviews and meta-analyses, narrowing them down to a final selection of 11 studies, which collectively integrated data from 6 randomized controlled trials and 26 observational studies. For primary efficacy outcomes, the HPSD approach led to a non-significant decrease in the risk of atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence (risk ratio [RR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-1.12; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 90%; <i>P</i> = .31) and a significantly reduced risk of AF recurrence (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.42-0.67; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%; <i>P</i> < .00001) compared to the low-power, long-duration (LPLD) approach. In terms of primary safety outcomes, the HPSD approach significantly reduced the risk of esophageal thermal injury (ETI) (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.83; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%; <i>P</i> < .00001) and facilitated a non-significant decrease in the risk of other major complications (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-1.03; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%; <i>P</i> = .10). In conclusion, HPSD therapy is safer and more effective than LPLD therapy, facilitating decreased AF recurrence rates along with reductions in ETI, total procedure duration, ablation number, ablation time, fluoroscopy time, and acute pulmonary vein reconnection.</p>","PeriodicalId":36299,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management","volume":"15 8","pages":"5963-5980"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11346500/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19102/icrm.2024.15083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects around 33 million people worldwide, rendering it a common cardiac arrhythmia. Catheter ablation (CA) has evolved as a leading therapeutic intervention for symptomatic AF. This umbrella review systematically evaluates existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses to assess the safety, efficacy, and potential of high-power, short-duration (HPSD) ablation as an alternative therapy option for AF. A thorough exploration was undertaken across PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify pertinent studies for inclusion in this umbrella review. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method was employed to assess the overall certainty of the evidence comprehensively, and the quality of the incorporated reviews was meticulously evaluated through use of the AMSTAR 2 tool, the Cochrane Collaboration tool, and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. In this study, we initially identified 35 systematic reviews and meta-analyses, narrowing them down to a final selection of 11 studies, which collectively integrated data from 6 randomized controlled trials and 26 observational studies. For primary efficacy outcomes, the HPSD approach led to a non-significant decrease in the risk of atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence (risk ratio [RR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-1.12; I 2 = 90%; P = .31) and a significantly reduced risk of AF recurrence (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.42-0.67; I 2 = 0%; P < .00001) compared to the low-power, long-duration (LPLD) approach. In terms of primary safety outcomes, the HPSD approach significantly reduced the risk of esophageal thermal injury (ETI) (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.83; I 2 = 0%; P < .00001) and facilitated a non-significant decrease in the risk of other major complications (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-1.03; I 2 = 0%; P = .10). In conclusion, HPSD therapy is safer and more effective than LPLD therapy, facilitating decreased AF recurrence rates along with reductions in ETI, total procedure duration, ablation number, ablation time, fluoroscopy time, and acute pulmonary vein reconnection.

高功率、短时间消融与低功率、长时间消融策略对心房颤动患者临床疗效的比较分析:Meta分析综合综述》。
心房颤动(房颤)影响着全球约 3300 万人,是一种常见的心律失常。导管消融术(CA)已发展成为治疗无症状房颤的主要干预手段。本综述系统地评估了现有的系统综述和荟萃分析,以评估高功率、短持续时间(HPSD)消融作为房颤替代疗法的安全性、有效性和潜力。我们在 PubMed、Cochrane 图书馆和 Embase 中进行了全面的搜索,以确定纳入本综述的相关研究。我们采用了建议评估、发展和评价分级法(GRADE)来全面评估证据的整体确定性,并通过使用 AMSTAR 2 工具、Cochrane 协作工具和纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表对纳入综述的质量进行了细致评估。在这项研究中,我们最初确定了 35 篇系统综述和荟萃分析,最后筛选出 11 项研究,这些研究共整合了 6 项随机对照试验和 26 项观察性研究的数据。在主要疗效结果方面,与低功率、长持续时间(LPLD)方法相比,HPSD方法导致房性快速性心律失常复发风险下降不显著(风险比[RR],0.88;95% 置信区间[CI],0.70-1.12;I 2 = 90%;P = .31),房颤复发风险显著降低(RR,0.53;95% CI,0.42-0.67;I 2 = 0%;P < .00001)。在主要安全性结果方面,HPSD 方法显著降低了食管热损伤 (ETI) 的风险(RR,0.71;95% CI,0.61-0.83;I 2 = 0%;P < .00001),并促进了其他主要并发症风险的非显著性降低(RR,0.87;95% CI,0.73-1.03;I 2 = 0%;P = .10)。总之,HPSD疗法比LPLD疗法更安全、更有效,有助于降低房颤复发率,同时减少ETI、手术总时间、消融次数、消融时间、透视时间和急性肺静脉再连接。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management
Journal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
70
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信