Atrial fibrillation supportive trial data: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Bot: Adding CME Category::Cardiology)
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
__NOTOC__
__NOTOC__
{| class="infobox" style="float:right;"
|-
| [[File:Siren.gif|30px|link=Atrial fibrillation resident survival guide]]|| <br> || <br>
| [[Atrial fibrillation resident survival guide|'''Resident'''<br>'''Survival'''<br>'''Guide''']]
|}
{| class="infobox" style="float:right;"
|-
| [[File:Critical_Pathways.gif|88px|link=Atrial fibrillation critical pathways]]|| <br> || <br>
|}
{| class="infobox" style="float:right;"
|-
| <small>Sinus rhythm</small> [[Image:Heart conduct sinus.gif|none|75px]]
| <small>Atrial fibrillation</small> [[Image:Heart conduct atrialfib.gif|none|100px]]
|}
{{Atrial fibrillation}}
{{Atrial fibrillation}}
{{CMG}}; '''Associate Editor(s)-In-Chief:''' {{CZ}}
{{CMG}}; {{AE}} {{CZ}}


==Clinical Trial Data==
==Supportive Trial Data==
Results from the Pulmonary Vein Antrum Isolation (PVAI) versus AV node ablation with Bi-Ventricular Pacing for Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Congestive Heart Failure (PABA-CHF) study suggest that pulmonary vein (PV) isolation leads to better morphologic and functional results than atrioventricular (AV) node ablation with biventricular pacing for [[congestive heart failure]] (CHF) in patients with atrial fibrillation.  
Results from the Pulmonary Vein Antrum Isolation (PVAI) versus AV node ablation with Bi-Ventricular Pacing for Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Congestive Heart Failure (PABA-CHF) study suggest that pulmonary vein (PV) isolation leads to better morphologic and functional results than atrioventricular (AV) node ablation with biventricular pacing for [[congestive heart failure]] (CHF) in patients with atrial fibrillation.  


In this prospective, multicenter study, 41 patients were randomized to PV isolation and 40 to AV node ablation with biventricular pacing. At 6 months, patients in the PV isolation group had higher mean ejection fractions (35% vs 29%, p<0.001), greater 6 minute distances walked (340 vs 297 meters, p <0.001), and better quality of life scores as determined by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire (60 vs 82, p<0.001, where lower scores indicate better quality of life) than those in the AV node ablation arm.  
In this prospective, multicenter study, 41 patients were randomized to PV isolation and 40 to AV node ablation with biventricular pacing. At 6 months, patients in the PV isolation group had higher mean ejection fractions (35% vs 29%, p<0.001), greater 6 minute distances walked (340 vs 297 meters, p <0.001), and better quality of life scores as determined by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire (60 vs 82, p<0.001, where lower scores indicate better quality of life) than those in the AV node ablation arm.  


These PABA-CHF study findings thus suggest the potential advantages of performing PV isolation over AV node ablation with biventricular pacing for this patient population.  
These PABA-CHF study findings thus suggest the potential advantages of performing PV isolation over [[AV node]] ablation with [[Cardiac resynchronization therapy|biventricular pacing]] for this patient population.  


Noted limitations of the study include using sites with extensive experience in performing ablations, an unblinded study design, and a relatively short follow-up time.
Noted limitations of the study include using sites with extensive experience in performing ablations, an unblinded study design, and a relatively short follow-up time.
==Related Chapters==
* [[The Living Guidelines: Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation | The AF Living Guidelines: Vote on current recommendations and suggest revisions to the guidelines]]
==Sources==
*[http://content.onlinejacc.org/cgi/reprint/48/4/e149.pdf ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation] <ref name="pmid16908781">Fuster V, Rydén LE, Cannom DS, Crijns HJ, Curtis AB, Ellenbogen KA et al. (2006) [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks&id=16908781 ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2001 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation): developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Rhythm Society.] ''Circulation'' 114 (7):e257-354. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.177292 DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.177292] PMID: [http://pubmed.gov/16908781 16908781]</ref>
*[http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/123/10/e269.full.pdf 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS Focused Updates Incorporated Into the ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation] <ref name="pmid21382897">Fuster V, Rydén LE, Cannom DS, Crijns HJ, Curtis AB, Ellenbogen KA et al. (2011) [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks&id=21382897 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS focused updates incorporated into the ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines.] ''Circulation'' 123 (10):e269-367. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0b013e318214876d DOI:10.1161/CIR.0b013e318214876d] PMID: [http://pubmed.gov/21382897 21382897]</ref>
*[http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/117/8/1101.full.pdf ACC/AHA/Physician Consortium 2008 clinical performance measures for adults with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter] <ref name="pmid18283199">Estes NA, Halperin JL, Calkins H, Ezekowitz MD, Gitman P, Go AS et al. (2008) [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks&id=18283199 ACC/AHA/Physician Consortium 2008 clinical performance measures for adults with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures and the Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement (Writing Committee to Develop Clinical Performance Measures for Atrial Fibrillation): developed in collaboration with the Heart Rhythm Society.] ''Circulation'' 117 (8):1101-20. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.187192 DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.187192] PMID: [http://pubmed.gov/18283199 18283199]</ref>


==References==
==References==
{{reflist|2}}
{{reflist|2}}
{{WikiDoc Help Menu}}
{{WikiDoc Sources}}
[[CME Category::Cardiology]]


[[Category:Electrophysiology]]
[[Category:Electrophysiology]]
[[Category:Cardiology]]
[[Category:Cardiology]]
[[Category:Emergency medicine]]
[[Category:Emergency medicine]]
 
[[Category:Needs overview]]
{{WikiDoc Help Menu}}
{{WikiDoc Sources}}

Latest revision as of 01:20, 15 March 2016



Resident
Survival
Guide
File:Critical Pathways.gif

Sinus rhythm
Atrial fibrillation

Atrial Fibrillation Microchapters

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical Perspective

Classification

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Atrial Fibrillation from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Screening

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Special Groups

Postoperative AF
Acute Myocardial Infarction
Wolff-Parkinson-White Preexcitation Syndrome
Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Hyperthyroidism
Pulmonary Diseases
Pregnancy
ACS and/or PCI or valve intervention
Heart failure

Diagnosis

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Laboratory Findings

Electrocardiogram

EKG Examples
A-Fib with LBBB

Chest X Ray

Echocardiography

Holter Monitoring and Exercise Stress Testing

Cardiac MRI

Treatment

Rate and Rhythm Control

Cardioversion

Overview
Electrical Cardioversion
Pharmacological Cardioversion

Anticoagulation

Overview
Warfarin
Converting from or to Warfarin
Converting from or to Parenteral Anticoagulants
Dabigatran

Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm

Surgery

Catheter Ablation
AV Nodal Ablation
Surgical Ablation
Cardiac Surgery

Specific Patient Groups

Primary Prevention

Secondary Prevention

Supportive Trial Data

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Case Studies

Case #1

Atrial fibrillation supportive trial data On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

Images

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA on Atrial fibrillation supportive trial data

CDC on Atrial fibrillation supportive trial data

Atrial fibrillation supportive trial data in the news

Blogs on Atrial fibrillation supportive trial data

Directions to Hospitals Treating Atrial fibrillation supportive trial data

Risk calculators and risk factors for Atrial fibrillation supportive trial data

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Cafer Zorkun, M.D., Ph.D. [2]

Supportive Trial Data

Results from the Pulmonary Vein Antrum Isolation (PVAI) versus AV node ablation with Bi-Ventricular Pacing for Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Congestive Heart Failure (PABA-CHF) study suggest that pulmonary vein (PV) isolation leads to better morphologic and functional results than atrioventricular (AV) node ablation with biventricular pacing for congestive heart failure (CHF) in patients with atrial fibrillation.

In this prospective, multicenter study, 41 patients were randomized to PV isolation and 40 to AV node ablation with biventricular pacing. At 6 months, patients in the PV isolation group had higher mean ejection fractions (35% vs 29%, p<0.001), greater 6 minute distances walked (340 vs 297 meters, p <0.001), and better quality of life scores as determined by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire (60 vs 82, p<0.001, where lower scores indicate better quality of life) than those in the AV node ablation arm.

These PABA-CHF study findings thus suggest the potential advantages of performing PV isolation over AV node ablation with biventricular pacing for this patient population.

Noted limitations of the study include using sites with extensive experience in performing ablations, an unblinded study design, and a relatively short follow-up time.

References


Template:WikiDoc Sources CME Category::Cardiology