Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- atrial fibrillation (4) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (4)
Background: This study sought to assess payer costs following cryoballoon or radiofrequency current (RFC) catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in the randomized FIRE AND ICE trial.
Methods and Results: A trial period analysis of healthcare costs evaluated the impact of ablation modality (cryoballoon versus RFC) on differences in resource use and associated payer costs. Analyses were based on repeat interventions, rehospitalizations, and cardioversions during the trial, with unit costs based on 3 national healthcare systems (Germany [€], the United Kingdom [£], and the United States [Embedded Image]). Total payer costs were calculated by applying standard unit costs to hospital stays, using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision diagnoses and procedure codes that were mapped to country‐specific diagnosis‐related groups. Patients (N=750) randomized 1:1 to cryoballoon (n=374) or RFC (n=376) ablation were followed for a mean of 1.5 years. Resource use was lower in the cryoballoon than the RFC group (205 hospitalizations and/or interventions in 122 patients versus 268 events in 154 patients). The cost differences per patient in mean total payer costs during follow‐up were €640, £364, and Embedded Image925 in favor of cryoballoon ablation (P=0.012, 0.013, and 0.016, respectively). This resulted in trial period total cost savings of €245 000, £140 000, and Embedded Image355 000.
Conclusions: When compared with RFC ablation, cryoballoon ablation was associated with a reduction in resource use and payer costs. In all 3 national healthcare systems analyzed, this reduction resulted in substantial trial period cost savings, primarily attributable to fewer repeat ablations and a reduction in cardiovascular rehospitalizations with cryoballoon ablation.
Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT01490814.
Transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is non-inferior to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in preventing thromboembolic events in atrial fibrillation (AF). Non-vitamin K antagonists (NOACs) have an improved safety profile over VKAs; however, evidence regarding their effect on cardiovascular and neurological outcomes relative to LAAO is limited. Up-to-date randomized trials or propensity-score-matched data comparing LAAO vs. NOACs in high-risk patients with AF were pooled in our study. A total of 2849 AF patients (LAAO: 1368, NOACs: 1481, mean age: 75 ± 7.5 yrs, 63.5% male) were enrolled. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.3 ± 1.7, and the mean HAS-BLED score was 3.4 ± 1.2. The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. In the LAAO group, the success rate of device implantation was 98.8%. During a mean follow-up of 2 years, as compared with NOACs, LAAO was associated with a significant reduction of ISTH major bleeding (p = 0.0002). There were no significant differences in terms of ischemic stroke (p = 0.61), ischemic stroke/thromboembolism (p = 0.63), ISTH major and clinically relevant minor bleeding (p = 0.73), cardiovascular death (p = 0.63), and all-cause mortality (p = 0.71). There was a trend toward reduction of combined major cardiovascular and neurological endpoints in the LAAO group (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.64–1.11, p = 0.12). In conclusion, for high-risk AF patients, LAAO is associated with a significant reduction of ISTH major bleeding without increased ischemic events, as compared to “contemporary NOACs”. The present data show the superior role of LAAO over NOACs among high-risk AF patients in terms of reduction of major bleeding; however, more randomized controlled trials are warranted.
The FIRE AND ICE Trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01490814) was initiated in 2012 as a multicenter, randomized, head‐to‐head comparison of radiofrequency current (RFC) and cryoballoon catheter ablation for the treatment of patients with drug‐refractory symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Six years on, it remains the largest, randomized comparison of safety and efficacy between 2 catheter ablation modalities used in the treatment of patients with AF. This landmark trial not only established noninferiority between cryoballoon and RFC ablation for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with regard to the study's efficacy and safety primary end points,1 but also, it evaluated secondary end points that were critical for a representative study interpretation. ...
Background: Outcomes of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) are variable and the predictors of success require further elucidation since the identification of correctable risk factors could help to optimize therapy. We aimed to assess the impact of body mass index (BMI) in the overall safety and efficacy of catheter ablation of AF, with emphasis on the use of cryoballoon ablation and novel oral anticoagulants.
Methods and Results: There were 2497 consecutive patients undergoing catheter ablation of AF in 7 European high volume centers were stratified according to BMI (normal weight <25 kg/m2, pre‐obese 25–30 kg/m2, obesity 30–35 kg/m2, and morbid obesity ≥35 kg/m2) and comparisons of procedural outcomes evaluated. Pre‐obese and obese patients presented more comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and sleep apnea), and had higher rates of non‐paroxysmal AF ablation procedures. The rate of atrial 12‐month arrhythmia relapse increased alongside with BMI (35.2%, 35.7%, 43.6%, and 48.0% P<0.001). During a median follow‐up of 18.8 months (interquartile range 11–28), after adjusting for all baseline differences, BMI was an independent predictor of relapse (hazard ratio=1.01 per kg/m2; 95% CI 1.01–1.02; P=0.002), adding incremental predictive value to obstructive sleep apnea. BMI was not a predictor for any of the reported complications. Using novel oral anticoagulants and cryoballoon ablation was safe and efficacy was comparable with vitamin‐K antagonists and radiofrequency ablation.
Conclusions: Obese patients present with a more adverse comorbidity profile, more advanced forms of AF, and have lower chances of being free from AF relapse after ablation. Use of novel oral anticoagulants and cryoballoon ablation may be an option in this patient group.