Abstract:Background The CASTLE-AF trial demonstrated that patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who underwent catheter ablation (CA) showed improved patient outcomes. These outcomes included a reduction in all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalizations along with an improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction, when compared to those receiving medical therapy alone. However, there is no data regarding development of novel HFrEF and the need for implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) in patients with AF who underwent CA vs. those on antiarrhythmic therapy (AAD). Purpose This study aims to assess if there is a difference in the development of HFrEF and the need for ICD intervention amongst AF patients who underwent CA vs. those on AAD. We hypothesize that patients with AF who underwent CA will have a decrease in the development of HFrEF and mitigation in the need for ICD intervention compared to AAD alone. Methods A large retrospective, multicentre database was utilized to identify patients aged 18-80 with AF from 2017-2023. Two cohorts were subsequently established based on treatment received: 1) CA vs. 2) AAD (amiodarone, flecainide, dronedarone, dofetilide, propafenone, sotalol). Patients with crossover between the groups were excluded. Student's t-test was performed to compare baseline characteristics between cohorts. Relevant comorbidities, atrial fibrillation types, and cardiovascular medications were used for propensity matching. Kaplan Meier curves were calculated to compare outcomes at 5 years such as HFrEF development, ICD implantation, mortality, and hospitalizations. Results Patients that underwent CA (n=32,774) and AAD (n=345,882) were propensity matched yielding 32,670 patients per cohort. CA demonstrated a significantly decreased need for ICD intervention compared to AAD (1.69% vs. 3.28%; HR=0.559; 95% CI [0.503, 0.621], log rank p<0.0001). Secondary outcomes showed significant reduction in development of systolic heart failure (4.83% vs. 10.60%; HR=0.499; 95% CI [0.467, 0.533], log rank p<0.0001), overall hospitalizations (12.03% vs. 27.32%; HR=0.440; 95% CI [0.420, 0.461], log rank p<0.0001), and all-cause mortality (2.38% vs. 14.19%; HR=0.188; 95% CI [0.174, 0.203], log rank p<0.0001) with catheter ablation. Conclusions Patients that underwent CA had a significant reduction in development of systolic heart failure and mitigation in the need for ICD implantation when compared to those on AAD alone. Randomized clinical trials are needed to better understand this relationship and to further define which subpopulation of atrial fibrillation patients would derive the most benefit from CA.

Using the New Antiepilepsy Drugs in Children

Diagnosis to Ablation in Persistent AF: Any Time Can Be a Good Time to Ablate

Catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: Who is the best candidate?

Strategic timing- early and delayed catheter ablation in atrial fibrillation

Early ablation leads to better outcome in patients < 55 years with persistent atrial fibrillation

Effect of Postablation Monitoring Strategy on Long-Term Outcome for Catheter Ablation of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

P6597Long-term Impact of Catheter Ablation on Growth Differentiation Factor-15 and Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio in Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation

First-Line Catheter Ablation of Monomorphic Ventricular Tachycardia in Cardiomyopathy Concurrent With Defibrillator Implantation: The PAUSE-SCD Randomized Trial

Impact of Different Ablation Strategies on the Delayed Cure after Trans-Catheter Ablation for Treating Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Left Atrial Function Predicts Atrial Arrhythmia Recurrence Following Ablation of Long-Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Catheter ablation vs. thoracoscopic surgical ablation in long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: CASA-AF randomized controlled trial

Effect of Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Combination With Catheter Ablation on Left Atrial Function for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Direct-to-catheter ablation versus second line catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation: Effect on arrhythmia recurrence, AF burden, early left atrium remodeling and quality of life

Lower Recurrence Rates of Atrial Fibrillation and MACE Events After Early Compared to Late Ablation: A Danish Nationwide Register Study

Localization of acid mucopolysaccharides in the Golgi complex of intestinal goblet cells. BNWL-480.

Comparison of left atrial dimensions in CT and echocardiography as predictors of long-term success after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation

Incidence of systolic heart failure and need for implantable cardiac defibrillators in patients with atrial fibrillation who had catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic medical therapy

Left atrial appendage closure in conjunction with radiofrequency ablation: Effects on left atrial functioning in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

Mid-to-long-term recurrence of atrial fibrillation in surgical treatment vs . catheter ablation: a meta-analysis using aggregated survival data

Genital infection and sperm agglutinating antibodies in infertile men.

Thoracoscopic Surgical Biatrial Ablation vs. Catheter Ablation in Patients with Persistent Atrial Fibrillation