» Articles » PMID: 27957062

Monitoring Atrial Fibrillation After Catheter Ablation

Overview
Date 2016 Dec 14
PMID 27957062
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Although catheter ablation is an effective treatment for recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF), there is no consensus on the definition of success or follow-up strategies. Symptoms are the major motivation for undergoing catheter ablation in patients with AF, however it is well known that reliance on perception of AF by patients after AF ablation results in an underestimation of recurrence of the arrhythmia. Because symptoms of AF occurrence may be misleading, a reliable assessment of rhythm outcome is essential for the definition of success in both clinical care and research trials. Continuous rhythm monitoring over long periods of time is superior to intermittent recording using external monitors to detect the presence of AF episodes and to quantify the AF burden. Today, new devices implanted subcutaneously using a minimally invasive technique have been developed for continuous AF monitoring. Implantable devices keep detailed information about arrhythmia recurrences and might allow identification of very brief episodes of AF, the significance of which is still uncertain. In particular, it is not known whether there is any critical value of daily AF burden that has a prognostic significance. This issue remains an area of active discussion, debate and investigation. Further investigation is required to determine if continuous AF monitoring with implantable devices is effective in reducing stroke risk and facilitating maintenance of sinus rhythm after AF ablation.

Citing Articles

Pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation: Does ablation technique influence outcome?.

Reddy S, Nethercott S, Khialani B, Virdee M Indian Heart J. 2021; 73(6):718-724.

PMID: 34743897 PMC: 8642637. DOI: 10.1016/j.ihj.2021.10.012.


Smartphone ECG Monitoring System Helps Lower Emergency Room and Clinic Visits in Post-Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Patients.

Aljuaid M, Marashly Q, AlDanaf J, Tawhari I, Barakat M, Barakat R Clin Med Insights Cardiol. 2020; 14:1179546820901508.

PMID: 32009826 PMC: 6974745. DOI: 10.1177/1179546820901508.


Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: An Overview for Clinicians.

Mujovic N, Marinkovic M, Lenarczyk R, Tilz R, Potpara T Adv Ther. 2017; 34(8):1897-1917.

PMID: 28733782 PMC: 5565661. DOI: 10.1007/s12325-017-0590-z.

References
1.
Forleo G, Mantica M, De Luca L, Leo R, Santini L, Panigada S . Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2: results from a randomized study comparing pulmonary vein isolation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2008; 20(1):22-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2008.01275.x. View

2.
Jais P, Cauchemez B, Macle L, Daoud E, Khairy P, Subbiah R . Catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drugs for atrial fibrillation: the A4 study. Circulation. 2008; 118(24):2498-505. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.772582. View

3.
Benjamin E, Wolf P, DAgostino R, Silbershatz H, Kannel W, Levy D . Impact of atrial fibrillation on the risk of death: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 1998; 98(10):946-52. DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.98.10.946. View

4.
Andrade J, Macle L, Khairy P, Khaykin Y, Mantovan R, De Martino G . Incidence and significance of early recurrences associated with different ablation strategies for AF: a STAR-AF substudy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012; 23(12):1295-301. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2012.02399.x. View

5.
Daoud E, Glotzer T, Wyse D, Ezekowitz M, Hilker C, Koehler J . Temporal relationship of atrial tachyarrhythmias, cerebrovascular events, and systemic emboli based on stored device data: a subgroup analysis of TRENDS. Heart Rhythm. 2011; 8(9):1416-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2011.04.022. View