It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to assess the impact of atrial fibrillation (AF) with and without the need for atrioventricular junction (AVJ) ablation on outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). METHODS: A single center cohort of 200 consecutive CRT patients was divided into three groups: 1) AF with CRT pacing < 95% in which AVJ ablation was performed (AF-ABL, n = 40; 20%), 2) AF without the need for AVJ ablation (AF-non ABL, n = 40; 20%), 3) sinus rhythm (SR, n = 120; 60%). All patients were assessed before CRT implantation and at 6-month follow-up. Positive clinical response to CRT was considered alive status without the need for heart transplantation and improvement ≥ 1 NYHA after 6 months. The comparative analysis among all study groups with respect to response-rate and long-term survival was performed. RESULTS: The 6-month response-rate in both AF-ABL and AF-nonABL was significantly lower than in SR (52.5 and 50 vs.77.5%, respectively; both p < 0.017), though there were no differences in baseline characteristics among study groups apart from higher baseline NT-proBNP levels in AF-ABL. However, after adjustment for this confounder, and despite optimal CRT pacing burden in study groups, the remote all-cause mortality during median follow-up of 36.1 months was significantly higher in AF-ABL than in SR (adjusted HR = 2.57, 95% CI 1.09–6.02, p = 0.03). What is more, no difference in long-term survival between SR and AF-nonABL was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the improvement of CRT pacing burden and thus response-rate up to the level of AF subjects without the need for ablation, the long-term survival of AF patients requiring AVJ ablation remains still worse than in SR.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Department of Cardiology, Congenital Hear t Disease and Electrotherapy, Medical University of Silesia, Silesian Center for Heart Diseases, Zabrze, Poland. [email protected]
2 Department of Cardiology, Congenital Heart Disease and Electrotherapy, Medical University of Silesia, Silesian Center for Heart Diseases, Zabrze, Poland