scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban and Warfarin in the Perioperative Period of Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation – Outcome Analysis From a Prospective Multicenter Registry Study in Japan –

2016 ◽  
Vol 80 (11) ◽  
pp. 2295-2301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ken Okumura ◽  
Kazutaka Aonuma ◽  
Koichiro Kumagai ◽  
Kenzo Hirao ◽  
Koichi Inoue ◽  
...  
Heart Rhythm ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 846-852 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackson J. Liang ◽  
David S. Frankel ◽  
Valay Parikh ◽  
Dhanujaya Lakkireddy ◽  
Sanghamitra Mohanty ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Adil K. Baimbetov ◽  
Kuat B. Abzaliev ◽  
Aiman M. Jukenova ◽  
Kenzhebek A. Bizhanov ◽  
Binali A. Bairamov ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Choi ◽  
Sung-Hwan Kim ◽  
Ju Youn Kim ◽  
Youmi Hwang ◽  
Tae-Seok Kim ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and objectives The efficacy of dexmedetomidine for radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) has not been well established. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of sedation using dexmedetomidine with remifentanil compared to conventional sedative agents during RFCA for AF. Subjects and methods A total of 240 patients undergoing RFCA for AF were randomized to either the dexmedetomidine (DEX) group (continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil) or the midazolam (MID) group (intermittent injections of midazolam and fentanyl) according to sedative agents. Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation was applied to all patients during the procedure. The primary outcome was patient movement during the procedure resulting in a 3D mapping system discordance, and the secondary outcome was adverse events including respiratory or hemodynamic compromise. Results During AF ablation, the incidence of the primary outcome was significantly reduced for the DEX group (18.2% vs. 39.5% in the DEX and the MID groups, respectively, p < 0.001). The frequency of a desaturation event (oxygen saturation < 90%) did not significantly differ between the two groups (6.6% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.056). However, the incidences of hypotension not owing to cardiac tamponade (systolic blood pressure < 80 mmHg, 19.8% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.011) and bradycardia (HR < 50 beats/min: 39.7% vs. 21.8%, p = 0.003) were higher in the DEX group. All efficacy and safety results were consistent within the predefined subgroups. Conclusion The combined use of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil provides higher stability sedation during AF ablation, but can lead to more frequent hemodynamic compromise compared to midazolam and fentanyl.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e041819
Author(s):  
Emmanouil Charitakis ◽  
Lars O Karlsson ◽  
Kostantinos Rizas ◽  
Henrik Almroth ◽  
Anders Hassel Jönsson ◽  
...  

IntroductionAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia. Catheter ablation (CA) of AF is an increasingly offered therapeutic approach, primary to relieve AF-related symptoms. Despite the development of new ablation approaches, there is no consensus regarding the most efficient ablation strategy. The objective of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare the efficacy and safety of all different CA approaches for the treatment of patients with paroxysmal (PAF) and non-PAF (non-PAF).Methods and analysisWe will perform a systematic search to identify randomised controlled trials of different CA approaches for the treatment of PAF and non-PAF, through the final search date of 1 March 2020. Information sources will include major bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL) and clinical trial registries. Our primary outcomes will be the efficacy (recurrence-free survival) and safety of different CA approaches for the treatment of AF. Secondary outcomes will be all-cause mortality and procedural time. An NMA will be performed to determine the relative effects of different catheter ablation approaches (such as pulmonary vein isolation alone or in combination with ablation lines, ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms, etc). In PAF, a separate analysis will be performed including different energy sources (such as radiofrequency, cryogenic and laser energy). Risk of bias assessment and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings to potential bias.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval will be needed because data are collected from previous studies. The results will be presented through peer-review journals and conference presentation.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020169494.


2012 ◽  
Vol 76 (10) ◽  
pp. 2337-2342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenichi Kaseno ◽  
Shigeto Naito ◽  
Kohki Nakamura ◽  
Tamotsu Sakamoto ◽  
Takehito Sasaki ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 168 (3) ◽  
pp. 2693-2698 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao-Dong Zhang ◽  
Jun Gu ◽  
Wei-Feng Jiang ◽  
Liang Zhao ◽  
Yuan-Long Wang ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document