Assessment of Atrioventricular Junction Ablation and VVIR Pacemaker Versus Pharmacological Treatment in Patients With Heart Failure and Chronic Atrial Fibrillation

Author:

Brignole Michele1,Menozzi Carlo1,Gianfranchi Lorella1,Musso Giacomo1,Mureddu Roberto1,Bottoni Nicola1,Lolli Gino1

Affiliation:

1. From the Department of Cardiology and Arrhythmologic Center, Ospedali Riuniti, Lavagna (M.B., L.G.); the Department of Cardiology and Arrhythmologic Center, Ospedale S Maria Nuova, Reggio Emilia (C.M., N.B., G.L.); and the Section of Arrhythmology, Ospedale Civile, Imperia (G.M., R.M.).

Abstract

Background —Uncontrolled studies have suggested that atrioventricular junction ablation and pacemaker implantation have beneficial effects on quality of life in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and Results —We performed a multicenter, controlled, randomized, 12-month evaluation of the clinical effects of atrioventricular junction ablation and VVIR pacemaker (Abl+Pm) versus pharmacological (drug) treatment in 66 patients with chronic (lasting >6 months) AF who had clinically manifest heart failure and heart rate >90 bpm on 3 standard ECGs recorded at rest during stable clinical conditions on different days. Before completion of the study, withdrawals occurred in 8 patients of the drug group and in 4 patients of the Abl+Pm group. At the end of the 12 months, the 28 Abl+Pm patients who completed the study showed lower scores in palpitations (−78%; P =0.000) and effort dyspnea (−22%; P =0.05) than the 26 of the drug group. Lower scores, although not significant, were also observed for exercise intolerance (−20%), easy fatigue (−17%), chest discomfort (−50%), Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (−14%), New York Heart Association functional classification (−4%), and Activity scale (−12%). The intrapatient comparison between enrollment and month 12 showed that in the Abl+Pm group, all variables except easy fatigue improved significantly from 14% to 82%. However, because an improvement was also observed in the drug group, the difference between the 2 groups was significant only for palpitations ( P =0.000), effort dyspnea ( P =0.01), exercise intolerance ( P =0.005), easy fatigue ( P =0.02), and chest discomfort ( P =0.02). Cardiac performance, evaluated by means of standard echocardiogram and exercise test, did not differ significantly between the 2 groups and remained stable over time. Conclusions —In patients with heart failure and chronic AF, Abl+Pm treatment is effective and superior to drug therapy in controlling symptoms, although its efficacy appears to be less than that observed in uncontrolled studies because some improvement can also be expected in medically treated patients. Cardiac performance is not modified by the treatment.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3