Variability and Utilization of Concomitant Atrial Fibrillation Ablation During Mitral Valve Surgery

Atrial Fibrillation Management During Surgical vs Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Societal guidelines support atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment during surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Recently, many patients with AF at low to intermediate risk are managed by transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Therefore, we evaluated longitudinal outcomes in these populations.

METHODS

The United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services inpatient claims database was evaluated for all beneficiaries with AF undergoing TAVR or SAVR with/without AF treatment (2018-2020). Treatment of AF included concomitant left atrial appendage obliteration, with/without surgical ablation, or endovascular appendage occlusion and/or catheter ablation at any time. Diagnosis-related group and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, codes defined procedures with doubly robust risk adjustment across each group.

RESULTS

A total of 24,902 patients were evaluated (17,453 TAVR; 7,449 SAVR). Of patients undergoing SAVR, 3176 (42.6%) underwent AF treatment (SAVR+AF). Only 656 TAVR patients (4.5%) received AF treatment. Comparing well-balanced SAVR+AF vs SAVR vs TAVR, there were no differences in the in-hospital incidence of renal failure, bleeding, or stroke, but increased pacemaker requirement (odds ratio [OR], 3.45; P < .0001) and vascular injury (OR, 9.09; P < .0001) were noted in TAVR and higher hospital mortality (OR, 4.02; P < .0001) in SAVR+AF. SAVR+AF was associated with lower readmission for stroke compared with SAVR alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; P = .029) and TAVR (HR, 0.68; P < .0001) and with improved survival vs TAVR (HR, 0.79; P = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

In Medicare beneficiaries with AF requiring aortic valve replacement, SAVR+AF was associated with improved longitudinal survival and freedom from stroke compared with TAVR. SAVR+AF treatment should be considered first-line therapy for patients with AF requiring aortic valve replacement.

Concomitant Surgical Ablation in Paroxysmal vs Persistent Atrial Fibrillation During Mitral Surgery

BACKGROUND

Despite prospective randomized evidence supporting concomitant treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) during mitral valve (MV) surgery, variation in surgical management of AF remains. We assessed longitudinal outcomes after surgical treatment of persistent or paroxysmal AF during MV surgery in Medicare beneficiaries.

METHODS

All Medicare beneficiaries with a diagnosis of AF undergoing MV surgery (2018-2020) were evaluated. Patients were stratified by no AF treatment, left atrial appendage obliteration (LAAO) alone, or surgical ablation and LAAO (SA+LAAO). Doubly robust risk adjustment and subgroup analysis by persistent or paroxysmal AF were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 7517 patients with preoperative AF underwent MV surgery (32.1% no AF treatment, 23.1% LAAO alone, 44.7% SA+LAAO). After doubly robust risk adjustment, AF treatment with SA+LAAO or LAAO alone were associated with lower 3-year readmission for stroke or bleeding. However, SA+LAAO was associated with reduced 3-year mortality and readmission for AF or heart failure compared with no AF treatment or LAAO alone. Compared with no AF treatment or LAAO alone, SA+LAAO was associated with lower composite end point of stroke (hazard ratio, 0.75) or death (hazard ratio, 0.83) at 3 years. Subgroup analysis identified similar longitudinal benefits of SA+LAAO in patients with persistent or paroxysmal AF.

CONCLUSIONS

In Medicare beneficiaries with AF undergoing MV surgery, SA+LAAO was associated with improved longitudinal outcomes compared with LAAO alone or no AF treatment in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF. These contemporary real-world data further clarify the benefit of SA+LAAO during MV surgery across all types of AF.

Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation is associated with improved survival compared with appendage obliteration alone: An analysis of 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries

OBJECTIVE

Societal guidelines support the concomitant surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Recent evidence has highlighted the stroke reduction of left atrial appendage obliteration with or without surgical ablation in similar populations. To inform clinical decision-making, we evaluated real-world outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac surgery by comparing no atrial fibrillation management with left atrial appendage obliteration alone versus surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration.

METHODS

By using the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services inpatient claims database, we evaluated all beneficiaries aged 65 years and older with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting or mitral/aortic/tricuspid valve repair or replacement between January 2018 and December 2020. Diagnosis-related group and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision procedure codes were used to define variables. Risk adjustment was performed with regression analysis using inverse probability weighting of propensity scores and Cox proportional hazards models. Subgroup analyses stratified patients by primary operation and paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation.

RESULTS

A total of 103,382 patients with preoperative atrial fibrillation were stratified by surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration (10,437; 10.1%), left atrial appendage obliteration alone (12,901; 12.5%), or no atrial fibrillation management (80,044; 77.4%). Patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (21,076; 20.4%) received the highest proportion of surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration (4661 19.4%) and left atrial appendage obliteration alone (3%724%; 15.4%) versus no atrial fibrillation management (15,688; 65.2%). Likewise, patients undergoing open atrial operations (mitral/tricuspid; 17,204; 16.6%) had higher proportions of atrial fibrillation treatment (surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration 5267 30.6%; left atrial appendage obliteration alone 4259 24.8%; no atrial fibrillation management 7678 44.6%). After robust risk adjustment, surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration was independently associated with reduced 3-year mortality compared with no atrial fibrillation treatment (hazard ratio, 0.68, P < .001) and left atrial appendage obliteration alone (hazard ratio, 0.90, P < .001). Compared with no atrial fibrillation treatment, readmissions for embolic stroke were lower with both surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration (hazard ratio, 0.77, P = .009) and left atrial appendage obliteration alone (hazard ratio, 0.73, P < .001). Reduction in 3-year composite mortality or stroke after surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration was superior to left atrial appendage alone (hazard ratio, 0.90, P = .035).

CONCLUSIONS

In Medicare beneficiaries with atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac surgery, the surgical management of atrial fibrillation was associated with lower 3-year mortality and readmission for stroke, with surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration being associated with higher survival compared with left atrial appendage obliteration alone.

Treating Atrial Fibrillation is No Maze: A Reminder to Heart Teams for Concomitant Surgical Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation With Cardiac Surgery

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent arrhythmia and is often found during times of other cardiac pathologies that require surgical management including coronary revascularization and valve surgery. Surgical ablation of AF, most frequently performed through the Cox-Maze IV procedure, is highly effective in restoring sinus rhythm. Despite robust society guideline recommendations for concomitant surgical ablation (CSA) for AF, the practice has yet to be widely adopted. In this review, we discuss the current indications for CSA, its efficacy in maintaining freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias, stroke, and adverse long-term outcomes, the safety profile of SA when performed alongside cardiac surgical cases, and challenges with its implementation across the most common concomitant cardiac operations. In conclusion, we present a reminder to multidisciplinary heart teams to consider CSA when indicated for their patients.

Concomitant Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation in Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

BACKGROUND

Societal guidelines support concomitant management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. To assess real-world adoption and outcomes, this study evaluated Medicare beneficiaries with AF who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with surgical ablation (SA) or left atrial appendage obliteration (LAAO) or both procedures in combination (SA + LAAO).

METHODS

The US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services inpatient claims database identified all patients with AF who underwent isolated CABG from 2018 to 2020. Diagnosis-related group and International Classification of Diseases-10th revision procedure codes defined covariates for doubly robust risk adjustment.

RESULTS

A total of 19,524 patients with preoperative AF who underwent isolated CABG were stratified by SA + LAAO (3475 patients; 17.8%), LAAO only (4541 patients; 23.3%), or no AF treatment (11,508 patients; 58.9%). After doubly robust risk adjustment, longitudinal analysis highlighted that concomitant AF treatment with SA + LAAO (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; P = .049) or LAAO alone (HR, 0.75; P = . 031) was associated with a significant reduction in readmission for stroke at 3 years compared with no AF treatment. Furthermore, SA + LAAO (HR, 0.86; P = .016) but not LAAO alone (HR, 0.97; P = .573) was associated with improved survival compared with no AF treatment. Finally, SA + LAAO was associated with a superior composite outcome of freedom from stroke or death at 3 years compared with LAAO alone (HR, 0.86;, P = .033) or no AF treatment (HR, 0.81; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In Medicare beneficiaries with AF who underwent isolated CABG, concomitant AF treatment was associated with reduced 3-year readmission for stroke. SA + LAAO was associated with superior reduction in stroke or death at 3 years compared with LAAO alone or no AF treatment.

One hundred percent utilization of a modified CryoMaze III procedure for atrial fibrillation with mitral surgery

OBJECTIVES

Concomitant atrial fibrillation often goes untreated because of surgeon concerns regarding lesion set complexity and pump times. We describe a new cryoablation procedure to address this.

METHODS

From June 2013 to March 2021, a modified CryoMaze III procedure was used using 3 left atrial ± 3 right atrial cryo-applications creating the key lesions of the Cox Maze III procedure. Since 2018, 3-minute cryo-lesions were used for the left atrial box lesion for total cryoablation times of 8 minutes for the left atrium ± 6 minutes for the right atrium. By using propensity matching, patients undergoing mitral valve surgery with no atrial fibrillation history were compared with CryoMaze III-treated patients.

RESULTS

A total of 100% of the 277 patients with atrial fibrillation requiring mitral valve surgery ± other procedures received the modified CryoMaze III procedure. After propensity score matching (n = 161 each group), the modified CryoMaze III group had mean crossclamp and bypass times 10.5 and 13.4 minutes longer than the control group, respectively. There were no significant differences in 30-day mortality, morbidity, pacemaker use, renal dysfunction, or late survival between groups, but there were less postoperative strokes in the CryoMaze III group. Freedom from atrial fibrillation off antiarrhythmics was 77% (mean follow-up of 3.0 ± 2.1 years). At 12 months, freedom from atrial fibrillation off antiarrhythmics was 90% for the 3-minute ablation group. Late survival was similar to age- and sex-matched Centers for Disease Control and Prevention controls.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified CryoMaze III technique is efficient, safe, and effective. Education of the surgical community regarding the late benefits of ablation and the simplicity of this new technique should improve adoption of the Class I Guidelines to treat concomitant atrial fibrillation.

Safety and efficacy of Cox-Maze procedure for atrial fibrillation during mitral valve surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Cox-Maze procedure is currently the gold standard treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, data on the effectiveness of the Cox-Maze procedure after concomitant mitral valve surgery (MVS) are not well established. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of Cox-Maze procedure versus no-maze procedure n in AF patients undergoing mitral valve surgery through a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic search on PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (Cochrane Library, Issue 02, 2017) databases were performed using three databases from their inception to March 2023, identifying all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Cox-Maze procedure versus no procedure in AF patients undergoing mitral valve surgery. Data were extracted and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this systematic review with 663 patients in total (341 concomitant Cox-Maze with MVS and 322 MVS alone). Across all studies with included AF patients undergoing MV surgery, the concomitant Cox-Maze procedure was associated with significantly higher sinus rhythm rate at discharge, 6 months, and 12 months follow-up when compared with the no-Maze group. Results indicated that there was no significant difference between the Cox-Maze and no-Maze groups in terms of 1 year all-cause mortality, pacemaker implantation, stroke, and thromboembolism.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review suggested that RCTs have demonstrated the addition of the Cox-Maze procedure for AF leads to a significantly higher rate of sinus rhythm in mitral valve surgical patients, with no increase in the rates of mortality, pacemaker implantation, stroke, and thromboembolism.

Effects of Atrial Fibrillation Radiofrequency Ablation in Patients Aged > 75 Years Undergoing Mitral Valve Surgery

BACKGROUND

Few data exist about the efficacy of radiofrequency (RF) maze procedures in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing surgery for mitral valve disease. The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate the effects of AF ablation associated with mitral valve surgery on the recovery and long-term maintenance of sinus rhythm in elderly patients aged > 75 years. Moreover, we evaluated the effects on survival.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study included 96 consecutive patients with AF (42 men and 56 women) aged > 75 years (mean age 78 ± 3) who underwent RF ablation associated with mitral valve surgery (group I). This group was compared to 209 younger patients (mean age 65 ± 8 years) treated in the same period (group II). Baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were similar in the two groups. Four patients died during hospitalization, one aged > 75 years. In surviving patients at the end of the follow-up period, sinus rhythm was present respectively in 64% of the elderly and 74% of younger patients (p = 0.778). The rate of persistence of sinus rhythm without AF recurrences (38% vs. 41%, p = 0.705) was similar in the two groups. After surgery, sinus rhythm was frequently never regained in aged patients (27% vs. 20%, p = 0.231). Elderly patients more frequently needed permanent pacing and had more hospitalizations and a higher number of non-AF atrial tachyarrhythmias. At eight-year follow-up, survival was lower in older patients (48% aged > 75 vs. 79% aged < 75 years).

CONCLUSION

Elderly patients had a similar long-term rate of stable sinus rhythm maintenance in comparison to younger patients after AF radiofrequency ablation associated with mitral valve surgery. However, they needed more frequent permanent pacing and had higher rates of hospitalizations and post-procedural atrial tachyarrhythmias. The effects of survival are difficult to evaluate due to the different life expectancies of the two groups.

Barriers to atrial fibrillation ablation during mitral valve surgery

BACKGROUND

Nearly 40% of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing mitral valve surgery do not receive concomitant ablation despite societal guidelines. We assessed barriers to implementation of this evidence-based practice through a survey of cardiac surgeons in 2 statewide quality collaboratives.

METHODS

Adult cardiac surgeons across 2 statewide collaboratives were surveyed on their knowledge and practice regarding AF ablation. Questions concerning experience, clinical practice, case scenarios, and barriers to implementation were included.

RESULTS

Among 66 respondents (66 of 135; 48.9%), the majority reported "very comfortable/frequently use" cryoablation (53 of 66; 80.3%) and radiofrequency (55 of 66; 83.3%). Only 12.1% (8/66) were not aware of the recommendations. Approximately one-half of the respondents reported learning AF ablation in fellowship (50.0%; 33 of 66) or attending courses (47.0%; 31 of 66). Responses to clinical scenarios demonstrated wide variability in practice patterns. One-half of the respondents reported no barriers; others cited increased cross-clamp time, excessive patient risk, and arrhythmia incidence as obstacles. Desired interventions included cardiology/electrophysiology support, protocols, pacemaker rate information, and education in the form of site visits, videos and proctors.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of evidence-based recommendations and practice patterns vary widely. These data identify several barriers to implementation of concomitant AF ablation and suggest specific interventions (mentorship/support, protocols, research, and education) to overcome these barriers.

Superiority of complete bi-atrial ablation procedure for atrial fibrillation in rheumatic mitral valve disease

INTRODUCTION

The necessity of complete bi-atrial lesion created by radiofrequency clamp and pen for nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with rheumatic mitral valve disease (RMVD) remains unclear.

METHODS

From January 2014 to December 2018, patients with RMVD concomitant with nonparoxysmal AF who underwent mitral valve surgery concomitant surgical ablation were retrospectively enrolled. We divided patients into Group A (complete bi-atrial lesion set created by radiofrequency clamp and pen) and Group B (simplified lesion sets created by radiofrequency clamp alone including bi-atrial ablation with incomplete mitral isthmus line and stand-alone left atrial ablation) according to the surgical ablation lesion sets. Propensity score matching was applied to analyze freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias between the two groups.

RESULTS

Two hundred eight (38.5%) and 332 (61.5%) patients were divided into Group A and Group B, respectively. In Group B, the proportion of patients with recurrent atrial flutter in the subgroup of bi-atrial ablation with incomplete mitral isthmus line was higher than that in Group A (p = .044). After propensity score matching, there were 203 patients in each group. Better freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias without antiarrhythmic drugs was obtained in Group A (83.1%, 79.6%, and 65.4%) than Group B (73.1%, 68.4%, and 52.7%) at 12, 36, and 60 months after operation (p = .012).

CONCLUSION

The application of radiofrequency clamp and pen to create complete bi-atrial lesion set in surgical ablation for nonparoxysmal AF in RMVD was associated with superior long-term efficacy.

Robotic-assisted Cryothermic Cox Maze for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: Longitudinal Follow-up

OBJECTIVES

Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is recommended as a stand-alone therapy for patients refractory to medical or catheter-based treatment, or as a concomitant therapy when associated with structural disease. We report a single-therapy robotic approach to the Cox maze with longitudinal follow-up.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent robotic biatrial cryothermic Cox maze for nonparoxysmal AF between November 2016 and January 2022 were examined at 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months. Freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia was assessed with 24-hour continuous electrocardiogram or pacemaker interrogation in all patients after 6 months. Mean follow-up was 17 ± 14.5 months (range, 1-60 months). Time to event analysis with competing risks was used to determine risk-adjusted associations with late outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients (n = 135) had a median AF duration of 4.0 years (interquartile range, 0.8-7.0), with 29.6% in whom 1 or more catheter ablations had failed. Stand-alone maze was performed in 25.2%, whereas 61.4% underwent concomitant robotic mitral valve surgery, 7.4% tricuspid valve repair, and 4.4% aortic valve replacement. No patients were discharged in AF. There were 3 operative mortalities (2.2%), none in stand-alone patients. One patient required catheter ablation at 8 months postoperatively, and one had a nonembolic stroke at 18 months. There were 9 late deaths. Freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia and antiarrhythmic drugs at 9, 12, 18, 24, 36, and 48 months was 97.0%, 96.7%, 98.1%, 97.1%, and 100%, respectively. Lower ejection fraction and need for concomitant mitral valve replacement and/or aortic valve replacement were independently associated with worse survival.

CONCLUSIONS

For persistent AF, robotic biatrial cryothermic Cox maze offered greater than 90% 1-year longitudinal freedom from stroke, oral anticoagulation, repeat ablation, and recurrent AF without the need for antiarrhythmic drugs.

Arrhythmias in Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Gaps in Knowledge and the Way Forward

The prevalence of both organic valvular heart disease (VHD) and cardiac arrhythmias is high in the general population, and their coexistence is common. Both VHD and arrhythmias in the elderly lead to an elevated risk of hospitalization and use of health services. However, the relationships of the two conditions is not fully understood and our understanding of their coexistence in terms of contemporary management and prognosis is still limited. VHD-induced left ventricular dysfunction/hypertrophy and left atrial dilation lead to both atrial and ventricular arrhythmias. On the other hand, arrhythmias can be considered as an independent condition resulting from a coexisting ischemic or non-ischemic substrate or idiopathic ectopy. Both atrial and ventricular VHD-induced arrhythmias may contribute to clinical worsening and be a turning point in the natural history of VHD. Symptoms developed in patients with VHD are not specific and may be attributable to hemodynamical consequences of valve disease but also to other cardiac conditions including arrhythmias which are notably prevalent in this population. The issue how to distinguish symptoms related to VHD from those related to atrial fibrillation (AF) during decision making process remains challenging. Moreover, AF is a traditional limit of echocardiography and an important source of errors in assessment of the severity of VHD. Despite recent progress in understanding the pathophysiology and prognosis of postoperative AF, many questions remain regarding its prevention and management. Furthermore, life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias can predispose patients with VHD to sudden cardiac death. Evidence for a putative link between arrhythmias and outcome in VHD is growing but available data on targeted therapies for VHD-related arrhythmias, including monitoring and catheter ablation, is scarce. Despite growing evidences, more research focused on the prognosis and optimal management of VHD-related arrhythmias is still required. We aimed to review the current evidence and identify gaps in knowledge about the prevalence, prognostic considerations, and treatment of atrial and ventricular arrhythmias in common subtypes of organic VHD.

The Convergent Procedure for AF: A Surgeon's Perspective

The Converge IDE Trial demonstrated improved patient outcomes in a challenging persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation population using a heart team hybrid approach with epicardial and endocardial staged ablations. Surgeons encounter unique circumstances with the surgical epicardial stage of the Convergent procedure which include unfamiliarity with left atrial posterior anatomy, endoscopic/thoracoscopic visualization, minimally invasive left atrial appendage management and expanded indications for the procedure. Overcoming these unique challenges is key to the adoption of the Convergent procedure as a critical off-pump approach that should be part of the surgical armamentarium in the treatment of atrial fibrillation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Efficiency and safety of ablation procedure for the treatment of atrial fibrillation in valve surgery: A PRISMA-compliant cumulative systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is the main complication of patients who suffer from valvular heart disease (VHD), which may lead to an increased susceptibility to ventricular tachycardia, atrial dysfunction, heart failure, and stroke. Therefore, seeking a safe and effective therapy is crucial in prolonging the lives of patients with VHD and improving their quality of life.

METHODS

Our target database included PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library, from which published articles were retrieved from inception to June 2020. We retrieved all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared patients undergoing valve surgery with (VSA) or without ablation (VS) procedure. Studies to be included were screened and data extraction was performed independently by 2 investigators. The Cochrane risk-of-bias table was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included RCTs. The mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and relative risk (RR) ratio was calculated to analyze the data. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I2 and chi-square tests. Egger test and the trim and fill analysis were used to further determine publication bias.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs that included 1376 patients were eventually selected for this meta-analysis. Surgical ablation was found to be effective in restoring sinus rhythm in valvular surgery patients at discharge (RR 2.91, 95% CI [1.17, 7.20], I2 97%, P = .02), 3 to 6 months (RR 2.85, 95% CI [2.27, 3.58], I2 49%, P < .00001), 12 months, and more than 1 year after surgery (RR 3.54, 95% CI [2.78, 4.51], I2 27%, P < .00001). All-cause mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI [0.64, 1.51], I2 0%, P = .94) and stroke (RR 1.29, 95% CI [0.70, 2.39], I2 0%, P = .57) were similar in the VSA and VS groups. Compared with VS, VSA prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass time (MD 30.44, 95% CI [17.55, 43.33], I2 88%, P < .00001) and aortic cross-clamping time (MD 19.57, 95% CI [11.10, 28.03], I2 89%, P < .00001). No significant differences were found between groups with respect to the risk of bleeding (RR 0.64, 95% CI [0.37, 1.12], I2 0%, P = .12), heart failure (RR 1.11, 95% CI [0.63, 1.93], I2 0%, P = .72), and low cardiac output syndrome (RR 1.41, 95% CI [0.57, 3.46], I2 18%, P = .46). However, the demand for implantation of a permanent pacemaker was significantly higher in the VSA group (RR 1.84, 95% CI [1.15, 2.95], I2 0%, P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Although we found high heterogeneity in the restoration of sinus rhythm at discharge, we assume that the comparison is valid at this time, given the current state in the operating room. This study provides evidence of the efficacy and security of concomitant ablation intervention for patients with VHD and atrial fibrillation. Surgical ablation would increase the safety of implantation of a permanent pacemaker in the population that underwent valve surgery.