Influence of atrial fibrillation type on outcomes of ablation vs. drug therapy: results from CABANA.
Date
2022-10
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Repository Usage Stats
views
downloads
Citation Stats
Abstract
Aims
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.Type
Department
Description
Provenance
Citation
Permalink
Published Version (Please cite this version)
Publication Info
Monahan, Kristi H, T Jared Bunch, Daniel B Mark, Jeanne E Poole, Tristram D Bahnson, Hussein R Al-Khalidi, Adam P Silverstein, Melanie R Daniels, et al. (2022). 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, 24(9). pp. 1430–1440. 10.1093/europace/euac055 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/31131.
This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
Scholars@Duke
Tristram Dan Bahnson
Hussein Rashid Al-Khalidi
My research interest includes design and analysis of cardiovascular clinical trials, medical devices, survival analysis, group-sequential analysis, time-to-recurrent or multiple events, continuous-time Markov models, stochastic process, linear model, dose-response modeling, design of experiments and adaptive designs.
Kerry L. Lee
As a faculty-level biostatistician, my research activities are focused on the statistical and data coordination aspects of several large multicenter clinical trials, and on statistical issues in the design and analysis of collaborative clinical research projects associated with the Duke University Cardiovascular Disease Database. I am currently the principal investigator of the statistical and data coordinating center for two NIH-sponsored multicenter randomized clinical trials, namely (1) the Pacemaker Mode Selection Trial, a 2000 patient study of dual chamber versus single chamber pacing in patients with sinus node dysfunction, and (2) the Sudden Cardiac Death in heart Failure Trial a 2,500 patient, three-arm randomized trial of implantable defibrillator therapy or amiodarone versus conventional therapy in patients with class II or III congestive heart failure. During the past year my colleagues and I have completed a third trial sponsored by the NIH for which I was the principal investigator of the data coordinating center. This trial assessed the efficiency of electrophy siologic-guided antiarrhythmic therapy in patients at risk for sudden cardiac death. I also serve as the statistical director and principal statistician for the following major clinical trials:
(1) Symphony II, a 7,000 patient randomized trial of long-term oral platelet inhibition therapy in patients following an acute coronary syndrome, sponsored by Hoffman-LaRoche.
(2) PARAGON B, a 5,200 patient trial of platelet inhibition therapy in patients with unstable angina, also sponsored by Hoffman-LaRoche.
Methodologically, my research activities are focused on the analytic and design issues associated with clinical trials, on regression modeling strategies for risk assessment with logistic and proportional hazards regression models, and on methods for validating prognostic models and assessing probabilistic predictions.
Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.