Original Title: 심방세동에서 catheter ablation의 임상적 유용성 비교 연구

Authors' recommendations: In this systematic review of sixty-seven studies including RCT and observational studies, it could not be concluded that catheter ablation is better than other treatments for rhythm control in patients with AF. (1) In CA versus AADs, there was insufficient evidence to suggest that CA is a better treatment compared with AAD therapy in AF patients. (2) In CA versus surgical procedures, through exploratory meta-analysis combining RCT and NRS, we found that surgical ablation is a promising treatment option compared with CA. (3) In CA versus electrical cardioversion, 2 studies (RCT 1, NRS 1) evaluated the safety and effectiveness of catheter ablation compared with elective electrical cardioversion for the treatment of AF and a qualitative review was carried out. (4) In comparisons with different CAs, there was limited evidence to suggest which ablation technique is the best treatment. Just, the use of CPVI/PVI/LA plus additional linear ablation in NRSs was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the recurrence of AF/AT. In comparing CA with surgical treatment using the national health insurance claims data, we found that the use of CA was related to a significant increase in retreatment compared with surgical treatment.

Project Status: Completed

Year Published: 2012

URL for published report: https://www.neca.re.kr/lay1/program/S1T11C145/report/view.do?seq=130

English language abstract: An English language summary is available

Publication Type: Not Assigned

Country: South Korea

Organisation Name: National Evidence-based healthcare Collaborating Agency

Contact Address: National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA), 3~5F Health and Welfare Social Administration B/D, 400 Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, Korea.

Contact Name: int@neca.re.kr

Contact Email: int@neca.re.kr

Copyright: National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA)