Cochrane · systematic review · CD012088
Efficacy and safety of ablation for people with non‐paroxysmal atrial fibrillation
Nyong, J, Amit, G, Adler, AJ, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
HeartAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
5
current version
GRADE rated
5
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 20%Low 3 · 60%Moderate 1 · 20%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Ablation compared to antiarrhythmic drug for participants with non‐paroxysmal atrial fibrillation
Population: people with non‐paroxysmal atrial fibrillation
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Freedom from atrial arrhythmia Ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug | RR 1.84 [1.17, 2.88] | 3 studies · 261 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Participants needing cardioversion Ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug | RR 0.62 [0.47, 0.82] | 3 studies · 261 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Cardiac hospitalisation Hospitalisations directly related to ablation or antiarrhythmic drugs Ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug | RR 0.27 [0.1, 0.72] | 2 studies · 216 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Significant bradycardia or need for a pacemaker Ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug | RR 0.2 [0.02, 1.63] | 3 studies · 261 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Periprocedural complications and other safety outcomes Ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug | RR 0.94 [0.16, 5.68] | 3 studies · 261 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |