Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Disclaimer
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jaïs, P.
Right arrow Articles by Packer, D. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Jaïs, P.
Right arrow Articles by Packer, D. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The European Society of Cardiology 2007. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Ablation vs. drug use for atrial fibrillation

Pierre Jaïs1,* and Douglas L. Packer2

1 Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut Lévêque, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Avenue de Magellan, 33604 Pessac, France
2 Mayo School of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA

* Corresponding author. Tel: +33 5 57 65 64 71; fax: +33 5 57 65 65 09. E-mail address: pierre.jais{at}chu-bordeaux.fr

The relative merits of rate and rhythm control in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) have been compared in several major clinical trials, none of which demonstrated a significant difference in all-cause mortality. Yet, there is clear evidence that restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm is associated with beneficial reverse atrial and ventricular remodelling. In addition, patients may feel better if AF is resolved, and data from some post hoc analyses suggest a possible mortality benefit. These apparently contradictory findings may reflect the high risk of serious adverse events associated with currently available antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD), counterbalancing their beneficial effect in restoring sinus rhythm. Catheter ablation offers an alternative means of restoring sinus rhythm in patients with AF and several clinical trials have indicated superior outcomes in certain subgroups after ablation with or without AAD vs. antiarrhythmic therapy alone. This study reviews the relative advantages and actual use of catheter ablation and other therapeutic options in the treatment of AF, with or without concomitant heart failure or structural heart disease. Catheter ablation is recognized in the latest ACC/AHA/ESC guidelines as a valid second-line option in patients who have failed or were intolerant of first-line antiarrhythmic therapy. In the absence of new antiarrhythmics with an improved benefit/risk profile, it could become a first-line strategy for certain patient populations. The ongoing CABANA trial should confirm its impact on overall survival relative to that of pharmacological rate or rhythm control.

Key Words: Atrial fibrillation • Antiarrhythmic drug • Catheter ablation • Sinus rhythm • Reverse remodelling


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Heart J SupplHome page
S. H. Hohnloser, G. Z. Duray, U. Baber, and J. L. Halperin
Prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation: current strategies and future directions
Eur. Heart J. Suppl., September 1, 2008; 10(suppl_H): H4 - H10.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.