Cited by 447Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments

Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea Reduces the Risk of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence After Catheter Ablation

Open access
Fein, Adam S., Shvilkin, Alexei, Shah, Dhaval, Haffajee, Charles I., Das, Saumya, Kumar, Kapil, Kramer, Daniel B., Zimetbaum, Peter J. +3 more·2013·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to examine the effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy on atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI).Background OSA is a predictor of AF recurrence following PVI. However, the impact of CPAP therapy on PVI outcome in patients with OSA is poorly known.Methods Among 426 patients who underwent PVI between 2007 and 2010, 62 patients had a polysomnography-confirmed diagnosis of OSA. While 32 patients were "CPAP users" the remaining 30 patients were "CPAP nonusers." The recurrence of any atrial tachyarrhythmia, use of antiarrhythmic drugs, and need for repeat ablations were compared between the groups during a follow-up period of 12 months. Additionally, the outcome of patients with OSA was compared to a group of patients from the same PVI cohort without OSA.Results CPAP therapy resulted in higher AF-free survival rate (71.9% vs. 36.7%; p = 0.01) and AF-free survival off antiarrhythmic drugs or repeat ablation following PVI (65.6% vs. 33.3%; p = 0.02). AF recurrence rate of CPAP-treated patients was similar to a group of patients without OSA (HR: 0.7, p = 0.46). AF recurrence following PVI in CPAP nonuser patients was significantly higher (HR: 2.4, p < 0.02) and similar to that of OSA patients managed medically without ablation (HR: 2.1, p = 0.68).Conclusions CPAP is an important therapy in OSA patients undergoing PVI that improves arrhythmia free survival. PVI offers limited value to OSA patients not treated with CPAP.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.03.052

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Observational studies generally found that OSA patients not treated with CPAP are significantly more likely to have recurrent atrial fibrillation after electrical cardioversion or ablation than CPAP-treated patients, with two- to six-fold higher adjusted risk of recurrence.

    “These studies have generally found that patients with OSA who are not treated with CPAP are significantly more likely to have recurrent AF than CPAP-treated patients, with two- to six-fold higher adjusted risk of recurrence.708,729,730,1215,1216”

    From International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea (2023) · cites this paper as [1215]

    The Results report significantly more recurrence after ablation among CPAP nonusers than users with OSA, and the Effects of CPAP therapy section describes nonusers as more than twice as likely to recur. The adjusted model in Results, however, compares each OSA group with patients without OSA; it does not report a direct adjusted risk estimate for nonusers versus CPAP users. This paper also does not provide a sixfold estimate. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fein, A. S., Shvilkin, A., Shah, D., Haffajee, C. I., Das, S., Kumar, K., Kramer, D. B., Zimetbaum, P. J., Buxton, A. E., Josephson, M. E., & Anter, E.
Affiliations
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Anter, Elad
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-07
Volume
62
Issue
4
Pages
300-305
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2093115827
Cited by
447
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 49 · 2016: 45 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 1
FWCI
30.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Medtronic
  • Biosense Webster and Rhythmia Medical
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Keywords
obstructive sleep apnea, atrial fibrillation recurrence, continuous positive airway pressure, catheter ablation, pulmonary vein isolation, arrhythmia-free survival, antiarrhythmic drugs, repeat ablation, CPAP therapy
MeSH terms
Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Atrial Fibrillation, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Recurrence, Risk Factors, Treatment Outcome, Catheter Ablation, Polysomnography, Sleep Apnea, Obstructive, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure

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