Abstract
Funding Acknowledgements
Type of funding sources: None.
Introduction
Catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter carries a risk of thromboembolism and major bleeding. Oral anticoagulation is advised for prevention of thromboembolic complications.
Purpose
In light of recent prospective trial data on the safety and efficacy of uninterrupted edoxaban in patients undergoing AF/flutter ablation, real-world data was aimed to compared.
Methods
A total of 228 patients who underwent AF/atrial flutter ablation over 14 months at our centre were retrospectively analyzed. All patients received uninterrupted oral anticoagulation for at least 4 weeks prior to ablation and 3 months post-ablation. Both bleeding and thromboembolic events were assessed at 24 hours comparing patients on warfarin, rivaroxaban and edoxaban.
Results
Mean age of patients were 68.5 +/- 8 years in the warfarin group (N = 86), 63.4 +/- 10.6 years; in the edoxaban group (N = 63) and 62.3 +/- 11.6 years in the rivaroxaban group (N = 79). CHADSVASc scores were 2.43 +/- 1.34, 1.68 +/- 1.34 and 1.64 +/- 1.38 respectively. The mean left atrial sizes were 42.7 +/- 6.8 mm, 42.0 +/- 6 mm and 41.1 +/- 6.5 mm respectively. The study endpoint was death, acute thromboembolism or major bleeding. There was 1 pericardial effusion (1.2%) in the warfarin group, 1 pericardial effusion and 1 transient ischaemic attack (2.5%) in the rivaroxaban group and 1 pericardial effusion needing drainage (1.6%) in the edoxaban group. There were no significant differences in the study endpoints between groups.
Conclusion
This real-world study demonstrated no significant difference in safety and efficacy between uninterrupted edoxaban, warfarin and rivaroxaban in patients undergoing AF/flutter ablation.
1090-215 Safety and efficacy of freezor MAX, a new 9FR, 8mm tip cryoablation catheter for the treatment of atrial flutter
