Hybrid ablation for persistent/long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

André Rivera,Marcelo Antonio Pinheiro Braga,Caique M. P. Ternes,Douglas Mesadri Gewehr,Felipe Villa Martignoni,Alexander Dal Forno,Andrew H. Locke,André d’Avila
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-024-01839-2
2024-06-23
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
Abstract:The efficacy and safety of hybrid ablation (HA) for patients with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) remain unclear. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HA (endo-epicardial ablation) versus endocardial ablation (EA) for patients with persistent/long-standing persistent AF. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled. Our meta-analysis included 3 RCTs comprising 358 patients, of whom 233 (65.1%) were randomized to HA. Compared with EA, HA reduced the recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.41–0.69; p < 0.01) but had no subgroup interaction according to AF type ( p = 0.90). There was no significant difference in major adverse events (RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.46–3.25; p = 0.68). Trial sequential analysis indicates that the observed effects can be deemed conclusive. In conclusion, in patients with persistent/long-standing persistent AF, HA substantially reduced the recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias. Notably, patients with long-standing persistent AF may benefit more from this ablation strategy.
cardiac & cardiovascular systems
What problem does this paper attempt to address?