Cited by 1,121Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies

Radiofrequency Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drugs as First-line Treatment of Symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Trial

Wazni, Oussama M., Marrouche, Nassir F., Martin, David O., Verma, Atul, Bhargava, Mandeep, Saliba, Walid, Bash, Dianna, Schweikert, Robert +11 more·2005·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs and anticoagulation is considered first-line therapy in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with radiofrequency ablation may cure AF, obviating the need for antiarrhythmic drugs and anticoagulation. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether PVI is feasible as first-line therapy for treating patients with symptomatic AF. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter prospective randomized study conducted from December 31, 2001, to July 1, 2002, of 70 patients aged 18 to 75 years who experienced monthly symptomatic AF episodes for at least 3 months and had not been treated with antiarrhythmic drugs. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to receive either PVI using radiofrequency ablation (n=33) or antiarrhythmic drug treatment (n=37), with a 1-year follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Recurrence of AF, hospitalization, and quality of life assessment. RESULTS: Two patients in the antiarrhythmic drug treatment group and 1 patient in the PVI group were lost to follow-up. At the end of 1-year follow-up, 22 (63%) of 35 patients who received antiarrhythmic drugs had at least 1 recurrence of symptomatic AF compared with 4 (13%) of 32 patients who received PVI (P<.001). Hospitalization during 1-year follow-up occurred in 19 (54%) of 35 patients in the antiarrhythmic drug group compared with 3 (9%) of 32 in the PVI group (P<.001). In the antiarrhythmic drug group, the mean (SD) number of AF episodes decreased from 12 (7) to 6 (4), after initiating therapy (P = .01). At 6-month follow-up, the improvement in quality of life of patients in the PVI group was significantly better than the improvement in the antiarrhythmic drug group in 5 subclasses of the Short-Form 36 health survey. There were no thromboembolic events in either group. Asymptomatic mild or moderate pulmonary vein stenosis was documented in 2 (6%) of 32 patients in the PVI group. CONCLUSION: Pulmonary vein isolation appears to be a feasible first-line approach for treating patients with symptomatic AF. Larger studies are needed to confirm its safety and efficacy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.293.21.2634

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • All available data point to lower recurrence rates after catheter ablation compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy with or without cardioversion in patients with persistent or long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation.

    “Fewer data are available reporting the effectiveness and safety of catheter ablation in patients with persistent or long-standing persistent AF, but all point to lower recurrence rates after catheter ablation compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy with or without cardioversion.185,717,[723][724][725][726]1039”
  • Fewer data are available reporting the effectiveness and safety of catheter ablation in patients with persistent or long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation.

    “Fewer data are available reporting the effectiveness and safety of catheter ablation in patients with persistent or long-standing persistent AF, but all point to lower recurrence rates after catheter ablation compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy with or without cardioversion.185,717,[723][724][725][726]1039”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wazni, O. M., Marrouche, N. F., Martin, D. O., Verma, A., Bhargava, M., Saliba, W., Bash, D., Schweikert, R., Brachmann, J., Gunther, J., Gutleben, K., Pisano, E., Potenza, D., Fanelli, R., Raviele, A., Themistoclakis, S., Rossillo, A., Bonso, A., & Natale, A.
Affiliations
Cleveland Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Natale, Andrea
Venue
JAMA
Published
2005-06-01
Volume
293
Issue
21
Pages
2634
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2154269490
Cited by
1,121
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 44 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 69 · 2013: 75 · 2012: 78
FWCI
43.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, radiofrequency ablation, pulmonary vein isolation, antiarrhythmic drugs, first-line therapy, atrial fibrillation recurrence, hospitalization, quality of life, pulmonary vein stenosis, anticoagulation, thromboembolic events, Short Form 36 Health Survey, randomized trial comparison, cost-effectiveness, patient satisfaction
MeSH terms
Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Atrial Fibrillation, Humans, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Prospective Studies, Pulmonary Veins, Quality of Life, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Catheter Ablation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review