TDNet Discover

Background: Atrial fibrillation is a disease that creates a significant burden on patients and the healthcare system alike. Atrial fibrillation is characterized by the rapid quivering of the atria, which predisposes the patient to hemostasis and thrombus formation while altering the cardiac muscle over time. Catheter ablation has been proposed as a first-line treatment for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, compared to the current recommendation to use rate or rhythm control medications to control symptoms. Purpose: This review aimed to assess the literature on the efficacy of catheter ablation compared to the current convention of antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Methods: This was performed by comprehensively searching the existing literature and extracting data from the selected articles. Google Scholar, Medline Complete, and PubMed were searched using phrases such as “catheter ablation, AFib, atrial fibrillation, antiarrhythmic drug therapy.” The inclusion criteria of the search included the last 10 years and adults 18 and over, as well as exclusion criteria of CHF or those published before 2013. A quality assessment was performed using assessment tools from The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to determine the quality of the selected articles. Finally, a data extraction tool was utilized to perform the qualitative analysis of the included studies. Results: The included articles support catheter ablation as an efficacious treatment that reduces recurrence rates, hospitalization, and mortality while improving quality of life. The studies suggest that recurrence, hospitalization, and atrial fibrillation-associated mortality rates are decreased, and quality of life is increased when catheter ablation is used compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy. v Conclusion: Catheter ablation intervention is effective and has a safer profile than antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Antiarrhythmic drug therapies have a wide array of side effects that can predispose patients to increased morbidity and mortality; catheter ablation does not carry the same side effect profile and is safe and effective. This leads to the conclusion that catheter ablation should be used as first-line treatment to prevent recurrence and improve patient outcomes, as opposed to antiarrhythmic drug therapy.