Loring, Zak

Background: Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction may improve survival and other cardiovascular outcomes. Methods: We constructed a decision-analytic Markov model to estimate the costs and benefits of catheter ablation and medical management in patients with symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%) and atrial fibrillation over a lifetime horizon. Evidence from the published literature informed the model inputs, including clinical effectiveness data from meta-analyses. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed. A 3% discount rate was applied to both future costs and benefits. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio assessed from the US health care sector perspective. Results: Catheter ablation was associated with 6.47 (95% CI, 5.89–6.93) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and a total cost of $105 657 (95% CI, $55 311–$191 934; 2018 US dollars), compared with 5.30 (95% CI, 5.20–5.39) QALYs and $63 040 (95% CI, $37 624–$102 260) for medical management. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for catheter ablation compared with medical management was $38 496 (95% CI, $5583–$117 510) per QALY gained. Model inputs with the greatest variation on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates were the cost of ablation and the effect of catheter ablation on mortality reduction. When assuming a more conservative estimate of the treatment effect of catheter ablation on mortality (hazard ratio of 0.86), the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $74 403 per QALY gained. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained, atrial fibrillation ablation was found to be economically favorable compared with medical management in 95% of simulations. Conclusions: Catheter ablation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients and atrial fibrillation may be considered economically attractive at current benchmarks for societal willingness-to-pay in the United States.

Background: The optimal timing of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) in reference to the time of diagnosis is unknown. We sought to assess the impact of the duration between first diagnosis of AF and ablation, or diagnosis-to-ablation time (DAT), on AF recurrence following catheter ablation. Methods: We conducted a systematic electronic search for observational studies reporting the outcomes associated with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation stratified by diagnosis-to-ablation time. The primary meta-analysis using a random effects model assessed AF recurrence stratified by DAT ≤1 year versus >1 year. A secondary analysis assessed outcomes stratified by DAT ≤3 years versus >3 years. Results: Of the 632 screened studies, 6 studies met inclusion criteria for a total of 4950 participants undergoing AF ablation for symptomatic AF. A shorter DAT ≤1 year was associated with a lower relative risk of AF recurrence compared with DAT >1 year (relative risk, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.65–0.82]; P <0.001). Heterogeneity was moderate (I 2 =51%). When excluding the one study consisting of only patients with persistent AF, the heterogeneity improved substantially (I 2 =0%, Cochran’s Q P =0.55) with a similar estimate of effect (relative risk, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.71–0.85]; P <0.001). Conclusions: Shorter duration between time of first AF diagnosis and AF ablation is associated with an increased likelihood of ablation procedural success. Additional study is required to confirm these results and to explore implementation of earlier catheter AF ablation and patient outcomes within the current AF care pathway. Visual Overview A visual overview is available for this article.