Browsing by Subject "Anti-Arrhythmia Agents"
Now showing 1 - 14 of 14
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access A multicenter retrospective cohort study on predicting the risk for amiodarone pulmonary toxicity.(BMC pulmonary medicine, 2022-04) Kwok, Wang Chun; Ma, Ting Fung; Chan, Johnny Wai Man; Pang, Herbert H; Ho, James Chung ManBackground
Amiodarone is one of the most commonly used anti-arrhythmic agents. Amiodarone pulmonary toxicity is a potentially fatal adverse effect associated with amiodarone use. Previous studies on the epidemiology and risk factors for amiodarone pulmonary toxicity showed diverse results.Methods
A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted to identify clinic-epidemiologic markers associated with amiodarone pulmonary toxicity for development of a prediction rule. Patients taking amiodarone who were managed in 3 centres in Hong Kong from 2005 to 2015 were included in this study. Penalized logistic regression was used to model the outcome as it is rare.Results
A total of 34 cases with amiodarone pulmonary toxicity were identified among 1786 patients taking amiodarone for at least 90 days from 2005 to 2015. The incidence of amiodarone pulmonary toxicity was estimated to be 1.9%. The risk factors for amiodarone pulmonary toxicity included advanced age (OR 1.047, 95% CI 1.010-1.085, p = 0.013), ventricular arrhythmia (OR 2.703, 95% CI 1.053-6.935, p = 0.039), underlying lung disease (OR 2.511, 95% CI 1.146-5.501, p = 0.021) and cumulative dose of amiodarone (OR 4.762, 95% CI 1.310-17.309 p = 0.018).Conclusions
The incidence of amiodarone pulmonary toxicity in Chinese patients in Hong Kong is estimated to be 1.9% in this study. Age, underlying lung disease, ventricular arrhythmia and cumulative dose of amiodarone are associated with the development of amiodarone pulmonary toxicity. A prediction rule was developed to inform the risk of developing amiodarone pulmonary toxicity.Item Open Access Ablation Versus Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Racial and Ethnic Minorities.(Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2021-07) Thomas, Kevin L; Al-Khalidi, Hussein R; Silverstein, Adam P; Monahan, Kristi H; Bahnson, Tristram D; Poole, Jeanne E; Mark, Daniel B; Packer, Douglas L; CABANA InvestigatorsBackground
Rhythm control strategies for atrial fibrillation (AF), including catheter ablation, are substantially underused in racial/ethnic minorities in North America.Objectives
This study sought to describe outcomes in the CABANA trial as a function of race/ethnicity.Methods
CABANA randomized 2,204 symptomatic participants with AF to ablation or drug therapy including rate and/or rhythm control drugs. Only participants in North America were included in the present analysis, and participants were subgrouped as racial/ethnic minority or nonminority with the use of National Institutes of Health definitions. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest.Results
Of 1,280 participants enrolled in CABANA in North America, 127 (9.9%) were racial and ethnic minorities. Compared with nonminorities, racial and ethnic minorities were younger with median age 65.6 versus 68.5 years, respectively, and had more symptomatic heart failure (37.0% vs 22.0%), hypertension (92.1% vs 76.8%, respectively), and ejection fraction <40% (20.8% vs 7.1%). Racial/ethnic minorities treated with ablation had a 68% relative reduction in the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.78) and a 72% relative reduction in all-cause mortality (aHR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.10-0.79). Primary event rates in racial/ethnic minority and nonminority participants were similar in the ablation arm (4-year Kaplan-Meier event rates 12.3% vs 9.9%); however, racial and ethnic minorities randomized to drug therapy had a much higher event rate than nonminority participants (27.4% vs. 9.4%).Conclusion
Among racial or ethnic minorities enrolled in the North American CABANA cohort, catheter ablation significantly improved major clinical outcomes compared with drug therapy. These benefits, which were not seen in nonminority participants, appear to be due to worse outcomes with drug therapy. (Catheter Ablation vs Anti-arrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation Trial [CABANA]; NCT00911508).Item Open Access An adverse reaction to a medication given to treat an adverse reaction: a teachable moment.(JAMA Intern Med, 2014-07) Rohrhoff, NJ; McNeill, DB; Boggan, JCItem Open Access Association Between Age and Outcomes of Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: Results From the CABANA Trial.(Circulation, 2022-03) Bahnson, Tristram D; Giczewska, Anna; Mark, Daniel B; Russo, Andrea M; Monahan, Kristi H; Al-Khalidi, Hussein R; Silverstein, Adam P; Poole, Jeanne E; Lee, Kerry L; Packer, Douglas L; CABANA InvestigatorsBackground
Observational data suggest that catheter ablation may be safe and effective to treat younger and older patients with atrial fibrillation. No large, randomized trial has examined this issue. This report describes outcomes according to age at entry in the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation).Methods
Patients with atrial fibrillation ≥65 years of age, or <65 with ≥1 risk factor for stroke, were randomly assigned to catheter ablation versus drug therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, the composite of mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, and recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Treatment effect estimates were adjusted for baseline covariables using proportional hazards regression models.Results
Of 2204 patients randomly assigned in CABANA, 766 (34.8%) were <65 years of age, 1130 (51.3%) were 65 to 74 years of age, and 308 (14.0%) were ≥75 years of age. Catheter ablation was associated with a 43% reduction in the primary outcome for patients <65 years of age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.57 [95% CI, 0.30-1.09]), a 21% reduction for 65 to 74 years of age (aHR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.54-1.16]), and an indeterminate effect for age ≥75 years of age (aHR, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.75-2.58]). Four-year event rates for ablation versus drug therapy across age groups, respectively, were 3.2% versus 7.8%, 7.8% versus 9.6%, and 14.8% versus 9.0%. For every 10-year increase in age, the primary outcome aHR increased (ie, less favorable to ablation) an average of 27% (interaction P value=0.215). A similar pattern was seen with all-cause mortality: for every 10-year increase in age, the aHR increased an average of 46% (interaction P value=0.111). Atrial fibrillation recurrence rates were lower with ablation than with drug therapy across age subgroups (aHR 0.47, 0.58, and 0.49, respectively). Treatment-related complications were infrequent for both arms (<3%) regardless of age.Conclusions
We found age-based variations in clinical outcomes for catheter ablation compared with drug therapy, with the largest relative and absolute benefits of catheter ablation in younger patients. No prognostic benefits for ablation were seen in the oldest patients. No differences were found by age in treatment-related complications or in the relative effectiveness of catheter ablation in preventing recurrent atrial arrhythmias.Registration
URL: https://www.Clinicaltrials
gov; Unique identifier: NCT00911508.Item Open Access Early experience with intravenous sotalol in children with and without congenital heart disease.(Heart rhythm, 2018-12) Valdés, Santiago O; Miyake, Christina Y; Niu, Mary C; de la Uz, Caridad M; Asaki, S Yukiko; Landstrom, Andrew P; Schneider, Andrew E; Rusin, Craig G; Patel, Raajen; Lam, Wilson W; Kim, Jeffrey JBACKGROUND:Arrhythmias are common in the pediatric population. In patients unable to take oral medications or in need of acute therapy, options of intravenous (IV) antiarrhythmic medications are limited. Recently IV sotalol has become readily available, but experience in children is limited. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to describe our initial experience with the use of IV sotalol in the pediatric population. METHODS:A retrospective study of all pediatric patients receiving IV sotalol was performed. Patient demographic characteristics, presence of congenital heart disease, arrhythmia type, efficacy of IV sotalol use, and adverse effects were evaluated. RESULTS:A total of 47 patients (26 (55%) male and 24 (51%) with congenital heart disease) received IV sotalol at a median age of 2.05 years (interquartile range 0.07-10.03 years) and a median weight of 12.8 kg (interquartile range 3.8-34.2 kg), and 13 (28%) received IV sotalol in the acute postoperative setting. Supraventricular arrhythmias occurred in 40 patients (85%) and ventricular tachycardia in 7 (15%). Among 24 patients receiving IV sotalol for an active arrhythmia, acute termination was achieved in 21 (88%). Twenty-three patients received IV sotalol as maintenance therapy for recurrent arrhythmias owing to inability to take oral antiarrhythmic medications; 19 (83%) were controlled with sotalol monotherapy. No patient required discontinuation of IV sotalol secondary to adverse effects, proarrhythmia, or QT prolongation. CONCLUSION:IV sotalol is an effective antiarrhythmic option for pediatric patients and may be an excellent agent for acute termination of active arrhythmias. It was well tolerated, with no patient requiring discontinuation secondary to adverse effects.Item Open Access Effect of Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy on Mortality, Stroke, Bleeding, and Cardiac Arrest Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The CABANA Randomized Clinical Trial.(JAMA, 2019-04) Packer, Douglas L; Mark, Daniel B; Robb, Richard A; Monahan, Kristi H; Bahnson, Tristram D; Poole, Jeanne E; Noseworthy, Peter A; Rosenberg, Yves D; Jeffries, Neal; Mitchell, L Brent; Flaker, Greg C; Pokushalov, Evgeny; Romanov, Alexander; Bunch, T Jared; Noelker, Georg; Ardashev, Andrey; Revishvili, Amiran; Wilber, David J; Cappato, Riccardo; Kuck, Karl-Heinz; Hindricks, Gerhard; Davies, D Wyn; Kowey, Peter R; Naccarelli, Gerald V; Reiffel, James A; Piccini, Jonathan P; Silverstein, Adam P; Al-Khalidi, Hussein R; Lee, Kerry L; CABANA InvestigatorsImportance
Catheter ablation is effective in restoring sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation (AF), but its effects on long-term mortality and stroke risk are uncertain.Objective
To determine whether catheter ablation is more effective than conventional medical therapy for improving outcomes in AF.Design, setting, and participants
The Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation trial is an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicenter, randomized trial involving 126 centers in 10 countries. A total of 2204 symptomatic patients with AF aged 65 years and older or younger than 65 years with 1 or more risk factors for stroke were enrolled from November 2009 to April 2016, with follow-up through December 31, 2017.Interventions
The catheter ablation group (n = 1108) underwent pulmonary vein isolation, with additional ablative procedures at the discretion of site investigators. The drug therapy group (n = 1096) received standard rhythm and/or rate control drugs guided by contemporaneous guidelines.Main outcomes and measures
The primary end point was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Among 13 prespecified secondary end points, 3 are included in this report: all-cause mortality; total mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization; and AF recurrence.Results
Of the 2204 patients randomized (median age, 68 years; 37.2% female; 42.9% had paroxysmal AF and 57.1% had persistent AF), 89.3% completed the trial. Of the patients assigned to catheter ablation, 1006 (90.8%) underwent the procedure. Of the patients assigned to drug therapy, 301 (27.5%) ultimately received catheter ablation. In the intention-to-treat analysis, over a median follow-up of 48.5 months, the primary end point occurred in 8.0% (n = 89) of patients in the ablation group vs 9.2% (n = 101) of patients in the drug therapy group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65-1.15]; P = .30). Among the secondary end points, outcomes in the ablation group vs the drug therapy group, respectively, were 5.2% vs 6.1% for all-cause mortality (HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.60-1.21]; P = .38), 51.7% vs 58.1% for death or cardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.74-0.93]; P = .001), and 49.9% vs 69.5% for AF recurrence (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.45-0.60]; P < .001).Conclusions and relevance
Among patients with AF, the strategy of catheter ablation, compared with medical therapy, did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. However, the estimated treatment effect of catheter ablation was affected by lower-than-expected event rates and treatment crossovers, which should be considered in interpreting the results of the trial.Trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00911508.Item Open Access Effects of Ablation Versus Drug Therapy on Quality of Life by Sex in Atrial Fibrillation: Results From the CABANA Trial.(Journal of the American Heart Association, 2023-02) Zeitler, Emily P; Li, Yanhong; Silverstein, Adam P; Russo, Andrea M; Poole, Jeanne E; Daniels, Melanie R; Al-Khalidi, Hussein R; Lee, Kerry L; Bahnson, Tristram D; Anstrom, Kevin J; Packer, Douglas L; Mark, Daniel B; CABANA InvestigatorsBackground Women with atrial fibrillation (AF) demonstrate more AF-related symptoms and worse quality of life (QOL). Whether increased use of ablation in women reduces sex-related QOL differences is unknown. Sex-related outcomes for ablation versus drug therapy was a prespecified analysis in the CABANA (Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation) trial. Methods and Results Symptoms were assessed periodically over 60 months with the Mayo AF-Specific Symptom Inventory (MAFSI) frequency score, and QOL was assessed with the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT) summary and component scores. Women had lower baseline QOL scores than men (mean AFEQT scores 55.9 and 65.6, respectively). Ablation patients improved more than drug therapy patients with similar treatment effect by sex: AFEQT 12-month mean adjusted treatment difference in women 6.1 points (95% CI, 3.5-8.6) and men 4.9 points (95% CI, 3.0-6.9). Participants with baseline AFEQT summary scores <70 had greater QOL improvement, with a mean treatment difference at 12 months of 7.6 points for women (95% CI, 4.3-10.9) and 6.4 points for men (95% CI, 3.3-9.4). The mean adjusted difference in MAFSI frequency score between women randomized to ablation versus drug therapy at 12 months was -2.5 (95% CI, -3.4 to -1.6); for men, the difference was -1.3 (95% CI, -2.0 to -0.6). Conclusions Compared with drug therapy for AF, ablation resulted in more QOL improvement in both sexes, primarily driven by improvements in those with lower baseline QOL. Ablation did not eliminate the AF-related QOL gap between women and men. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00911508.Item Open Access Increased Heart Rate Is Associated With Higher Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (AF): Results From the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF).(J Am Heart Assoc, 2015-09-14) Steinberg, Benjamin A; Kim, Sunghee; Thomas, Laine; Fonarow, Gregg C; Gersh, Bernard J; Holmqvist, Fredrik; Hylek, Elaine; Kowey, Peter R; Mahaffey, Kenneth W; Naccarelli, Gerald; Reiffel, James A; Chang, Paul; Peterson, Eric D; Piccini, Jonathan P; Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT‐AF) Investigators and PatientsBACKGROUND: Most patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) require rate control; however, the optimal target heart rate remains under debate. We aimed to assess rate control and subsequent outcomes among patients with permanent AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 2812 US outpatients with permanent AF in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation. Resting heart rate was measured longitudinally and used as a time-dependent covariate in multivariable Cox models of all-cause and cause-specific mortality during a median follow-up of 24 months. At baseline, 7.4% (n=207) had resting heart rate <60 beats per minute (bpm), 62% (n=1755) 60 to 79 bpm, 29% (n=817) 80 to 109 bpm, and 1.2% (n=33) ≥110 bpm. Groups did not differ by age, previous cerebrovascular disease, heart failure status, CHA2DS2-VASc scores, renal function, or left ventricular function. There were significant differences in race (P=0.001), sinus node dysfunction (P=0.004), and treatment with calcium-channel blockers (P=0.006) and anticoagulation (P=0.009). In analyses of continuous heart rates, lower heart rate ≤65 bpm was associated with higher all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.15 per 5-bpm decrease; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P=0.04). Similarly, increasing heart rate >65 bpm was associated with higher all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 1.10 per 5-bpm increase; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.15; P<0.0001). This relationship was consistent across endpoints and in a broader sensitivity analysis of permanent and nonpermanent AF patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with permanent AF, there is a J-shaped relationship between heart rate and mortality. These data support current guideline recommendations, and clinical trials are warranted to determine optimal rate control. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01165710.Item Open Access Influence of atrial fibrillation type on outcomes of ablation vs. drug therapy: results from CABANA.(Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2022-10) Monahan, Kristi H; Bunch, T Jared; Mark, Daniel B; Poole, Jeanne E; Bahnson, Tristram D; Al-Khalidi, Hussein R; Silverstein, Adam P; Daniels, Melanie R; Lee, Kerry L; Packer, Douglas L; CABANA InvestigatorsAims
Influence of atrial fibrillation (AF) type on outcomes seen with catheter ablation vs. drug therapy is incompletely understood. This study assesses the impact of AF type on treatment outcomes in the Catheter Ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation Trial (CABANA).Methods and results
CABANA randomized 2204 patients ≥65 years old or <65 with at least one risk factor for stroke to catheter ablation or drug therapy. Of these, 946 (42.9%) had paroxysmal AF (PAF), 1042 (47.3%) had persistent AF (PersAF), and 215 (9.8%) had long-standing persistent AF (LSPAF) at baseline. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Symptoms were measured with the Mayo AF-Specific Symptom Inventory (MAFSI), and quality of life was measured with the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT). Comparisons are reported by intention to treat. Compared with drug therapy alone, catheter ablation produced a 19% relative risk reduction in the primary endpoint for PAF {adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.81 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50, 1.30]}, and a 17% relative reduction for PersAF (aHR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.56, 1.22). For LSPAF, the ablation relative effect was a 7% reduction (aHR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.36, 2.44). Ablation was more effective than drug therapy at reducing first AF recurrence in all AF types: by 51% for PAF (aHR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39, 0.62), by 47% for PersAF (aHR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.43,0.65), and by 36% for LSPAF (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41,1.00). Ablation was associated with greater improvement in symptoms, with the mean difference between groups in the MAFSI frequency score favouring ablation over 5 years of follow-up in all subgroups: PAF had a clinically significant -1.9-point difference (95% CI: -1.2 to -2.6); PersAF a -0.9 difference (95% CI: -0.2 to -1.6); LSPAF a clinically significant difference of -1.6 points (95% CI: -0.1 to -3.1). Ablation was also associated with greater improvement in quality of life in all subgroups, with the AFEQT overall score in PAF patients showing a clinically significant 5.3-point improvement (95% CI: 3.3 to 7.3) over drug therapy alone over 5 years of follow-up, PersAF a 1.7-point difference (95% CI: 0.0 to 3.7), and LSPAF a 3.1-point difference (95% CI: -1.6 to 7.8).Conclusion
Prognostic treatment effects of catheter ablation compared with drug therapy on the primary and major secondary clinical endpoints did not differ consequentially by AF subtype. With regard to decreases in AF recurrence and improving quality of life, ablation was more effective than drug therapy in all three AF type subgroups.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier
NCT00911508.Item Open Access Prognostic Impact of Sinus Rhythm in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Separating Rhythm Outcomes From Randomized Strategy Findings From the CABANA Trial.(Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology, 2024-05) Bunch, T Jared; Poole, Jeanne E; Silverstein, Adam P; Lee, Kerry L; Al-Khalidi, Hussein R; Hindricks, Gerhard; Romanov, Alexander; Romanov, Alexander; Pokushalov, Evgeny; Bahnson, Tristram D; Daniels, Melanie R; Piccini, Jonathan P; Mark, Daniel B; Packer, Douglas L; CABANA InvestigatorsBackground
Clinically detected atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a significant increase in mortality and other adverse cardiovascular events. Since the advent of effective methods for AF rhythm control, investigators have attempted to determine how much these adverse prognostic AF effects could be mitigated by the restoration of sinus rhythm (SR) and whether the method used mattered.Methods
The CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation) randomized 2204 AF patients to ablation versus drug therapy, of which 1240 patients were monitored in follow-up using the CABANA ECG rhythm monitoring system. To assess the prognostic benefits of SR, we performed a prespecified analysis using Cox survival modeling with heart rhythm as a time-dependent variable and randomized treatment group as a stratification factor.Results
In the 1240 patient study cohort, 883 (71.2%) had documented AF at some point during their postblanking follow-up. Among the 883 patients, 671 (76.0%) experienced AF within the first year of postblanking follow-up, and 212 (24.0%) experienced their first AF after ≥1 year of postblanking follow-up. The primary CABANA end point (death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest) occurred in 95 (10.8%) of the 883 patients with documented AF and in 29 (8.1%) of the 357 patients with no AF recorded during follow-up. In multivariable time-dependent analysis, the presence of SR (compared with non-SR) was associated with a significantly reduced risk of the primary end point (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.38-0.85]; P=0.006; independent of treatment strategy [ablation versus drugs]). Corresponding results for all-cause mortality were adjusted hazard ratio of 0.59 [95% CI, 0.35-1.01]; P=0.053).Conclusions
In patients in the CABANA trial with detailed long-term rhythm follow-up, increased time in SR was associated with a clinically consequential decrease in mortality and other adverse prognostic events. The predictive value of SR was independent of the therapeutic approach responsible for reducing the burden of detectable AF.Registration
URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT00911508.Item Open Access Provider specialty and atrial fibrillation treatment strategies in United States community practice: findings from the ORBIT-AF registry.(J Am Heart Assoc, 2013-07-18) Fosbol, Emil L; Holmes, DaJuanicia N; Piccini, Jonathan P; Thomas, Laine; Reiffel, James A; Mills, Roger M; Kowey, Peter; Mahaffey, Kenneth; Gersh, Bernard J; Peterson, Eric D; ORBIT-AF Investigators and PatientsBACKGROUND: The prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) continues to increase; however, there are limited data describing the division of care among practitioners in the community and whether care differs depending on provider specialty. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF) Registry, we described patient characteristics and AF management strategies in ambulatory clinic practice settings, including electrophysiology (EP), general cardiology, and primary care. A total of 10 097 patients were included; of these, 1544 (15.3%) were cared for by an EP provider, 6584 (65.2%) by a cardiology provider, and 1969 (19.5%) by an internal medicine/primary care provider. Compared with those patients who were cared for by cardiologists or internal medicine/primary care providers, patients cared for by EP providers were younger (median age, 73 years [interquartile range, IQR, 64, 80 years, Q1, Q3] versus 75 years [IQR, 67, 82 years] for cardiology and versus 76 years [IQR, 68, 82 years] for primary care). Compared with cardiology and internal medicine/primary care providers, EP providers used rhythm control (versus rate control) management more often (44.2% versus 29.7% and 28.8%, respectively, P<0.0001; adjusted odds ratio [OR] EP versus cardiology, 1.66 [95% confidence interval, CI, 1.05 to 2.61]; adjusted OR for internal medicine/primary care versus cardiology, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.65 to 1.26]). Use of oral anticoagulant therapy was high across all providers, although it was higher for cardiology and EP providers (overall, 76.1%; P=0.02 for difference between groups). CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate important differences between provider specialties, the demographics of the AF patient population treated, and treatment strategies-particularly for rhythm control and anticoagulation therapy.Item Open Access Recurrence of Atrial Fibrillation After Catheter Ablation or Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in the CABANA Trial.(Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2020-06) Poole, Jeanne E; Bahnson, Tristram D; Monahan, Kristi H; Johnson, George; Rostami, Hoss; Silverstein, Adam P; Al-Khalidi, Hussein R; Rosenberg, Yves; Mark, Daniel B; Lee, Kerry L; Packer, Douglas L; CABANA Investigators and ECG Rhythm Core LabBackground
The CABANA (Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation) trial randomized 2,204 patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) to catheter ablation or drug therapy. Analysis by intention-to-treat showed a nonsignificant 14% relative reduction in the primary outcome of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest.Objectives
The purpose of this study was to assess recurrence of AF in the CABANA trial.Methods
The authors prospectively studied CABANA patients using a proprietary electrocardiogram recording monitor for symptom-activated and 24-h AF auto detection. The AF recurrence endpoint was any post-90-day blanking atrial tachyarrhythmias lasting 30 s or longer. Biannual 96-h Holter monitoring was used to assess AF burden. Patients who used the CABANA monitors and provided 90-day post-blanking recordings qualified for this analysis (n = 1,240; 56% of CABANA population). Treatment comparisons were performed using a modified intention-to-treat approach.Results
Median age of the 1,240 patients was 68 years, 34.4% were women, and AF was paroxysmal in 43.0%. Over 60 months of follow-up, first recurrence of any symptomatic or asymptomatic AF (hazard ratio: 0.52; 95% confidence interval: 0.45 to 0.60; p < 0.001) or first symptomatic-only AF (hazard ratio: 0.49; 95% confidence interval: 0.39 to 0.61; p < 0.001) were both significantly reduced in the catheter ablation group. Baseline Holter AF burden in both treatment groups was 48%. At 12 months, AF burden in ablation patients averaged 6.3%, and in drug-therapy patients, 14.4%. AF burden was significantly less in catheter ablation compared with drug-therapy patients across the 5-year follow-up (p < 0.001). These findings were not sensitive to the baseline pattern of AF.Conclusions
Catheter ablation was effective in reducing recurrence of any AF by 48% and symptomatic AF by 51% compared with drug therapy over 5 years of follow-up. Furthermore, AF burden was also significantly reduced in catheter ablation patients, regardless of their baseline AF type. (Catheter Ablation vs Anti-arrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation Trial [CABANA]; NCT00911508).Item Open Access Regional differences in outcomes with ablation versus drug therapy for atrial fibrillation: Results from the CABANA trial.(American heart journal, 2024-04) Cappato, Riccardo; Mark, Daniel B; Silverstein, Adam P; Noseworthy, Peter A; Bonitta, Gianluca; Poole, Jeanne E; Piccini, Jonathan P; Bahnson, Tristram D; Daniels, Melanie R; Al-Khalidi, Hussein R; Lee, Kerry L; Packer, Douglas L; CABANA InvestigatorsBackground
The finding of unexpected variations in treatment benefits by geographic region in international clinical trials raises complex questions about the interpretation and generalizability of trial findings. We observed such geographical variations in outcome and in the effectiveness of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation versus drug therapy in the Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation (CABANA) trial. This paper describes these differences and investigates potential causes.Methods
The examination of treatment effects by geographic region was a prespecified analysis. CABANA enrolled patients from 10 countries, with 1,285 patients at 85 North American (NA) sites and 919 at 41 non-NA sites. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Death and first atrial fibrillation recurrence were secondary endpoints.Results
At least 1 primary endpoint event occurred in 157 patients (12.2%) from NA and 33 (3.6%) from non-NA sites over a median 54.9 and 40.5 months of follow-up, respectively (NA/non-NA adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48-3.21, P < .001). In NA patients, 78 events occurred in the ablation and 79 in the drug arm, (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.66, 1.24) while 11 and 22 events occurred in non-NA patients (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.25,1.05, interaction P = .154). Death occurred in 53 ablation and 51 drug therapy patients in the NA group (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65,1.42) and in 5 ablation and 16 drug therapy patients in the non-NA group (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12,0.86, interaction P = .044). Adjusting for baseline regional differences or prognostic risk variables did not account for the regional differences in treatment effects. Atrial fibrillation recurrence was reduced by ablation in both regions (NA: HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46, 0.63; non-NA: HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30, 0.64, interaction P = .322).Conclusions
In CABANA, primary outcome events occurred significantly more often in the NA group but assignment to ablation significantly reduced all-cause mortality in the non-NA group only. These differences were not explained by regional variations in procedure effectiveness, safety, or patient characteristics.Clinical trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0091150; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00911508.Item Open Access Treatment-Related Changes in Left Atrial Structure in Atrial Fibrillation: Findings From the CABANA Imaging Substudy.(Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology, 2021-05) Rettmann, Maryam E; Holmes, David R; Monahan, Kristi H; Breen, Jerome F; Bahnson, Tristram D; Mark, Daniel B; Poole, Jeanne E; Ellis, Alicia M; Silverstein, Adam P; Al-Khalidi, Hussein R; Lee, Kerry L; Robb, Richard A; Packer, Douglas L; CABANA Imaging Investigators[Figure: see text].