AbstractIntroductionAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia with a high stroke and mortality rate. The video‐assisted thoracoscopic radiofrequency pulmonary vein ablation is a treatment option for patients who fail catheter ablation. Randomized data comparing surgical versus catheter ablation are limited. We performed a meta‐analysis of randomized control trials to explore the outcome efficacy between surgical and catheter radiofrequency pulmonary vein ablation in patients with AF.MethodsWe comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to December 2020. Included studies were published randomized control trials that compared video‐assisted thoracoscopic and catheter radiofrequency pulmonary vein ablation. Data from each study were combined using the fixed‐effects, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian, and Laird to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.ResultsSix studies from November 2013 to 2020 were included in this meta‐analysis involving 511 AF patients (79% paroxysmal) with 263 catheter ablation (mean age 56 ± 3 years) and 248 surgical ablations (mean age 52 ± 4 years). Catheter ablation was associated with increased atrial arrhythmias recurrence when compared to surgical ablation (pooled relative risk = 1.85, 95% confidence interval: 1.44−2.39, p < .001, I2 = 0.0%) but associated with less total major adverse events (pooled relative risk = 0.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.16−0.53, p < .001, I2 = 0.0%). In subgroup analysis, catheter ablation was associated with increased AF recurrence in refractory paroxysmal AF when compared to surgical ablation (pooled relative risk = 2.47, 95% confidence interval: 1.31−4.65, p = .005, I2 = 0.0%) but not in persistent AF (relative risk = 1.09, 95% confidence interval: 0.60−2.0, p = .773).ConclusionCatheter ablation was associated with higher atrial arrhythmia recurrence when compared with surgical ablation. However, our study suggests that the benefit of surgical ablation in patients with persistent AF is unclear. More studies and alternative ablation strategies investigation in persistent AF are warranted.
Does the Age of Sudden Cardiac Death in Family Members Matter in Brugada Syndrome?
Background Brugada syndrome is an inherited cardiac channelopathy associated with major arrhythmic events (MAEs). The presence of a positive family history of sudden cardiac death (SCD) as a risk predictor of MAE remains controversial. We aimed to examine the association between family history of SCD and MAEs stratified by age of SCD with a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods and Results We searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 1992 to January 2020. Data from each study were combined using the random‐effects model. Fitted metaregression was performed to evaluate the association between the age of SCD in families and the risk of MAE. Twenty‐two studies from 2004 to 2019 were included in this meta‐analysis involving 3386 patients with Brugada syndrome. The overall family history of SCD was not associated with increased risk of MAE in Brugada syndrome (pooled odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% CI, 0.82–1.51; P =0.489, I 2 =45.0%). However, a history of SCD in family members of age younger than 40 years of age did increase the risk of MAE by ≈2‐fold (pooled OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.11–3.73; P =0.022, I 2 =0.0%). When stratified by the age of cut point at 50, 45, 40, and 35 years old, a history of SCD in younger family member was significantly associated with a higher risk of MAE (pooled OR, 0.49, 1.30, 1.51, and 2.97, respectively; P =0.046). Conclusions A history of SCD among family members of age younger than 40 years was associated with a higher risk of MAE.