Doctors & patients are saying about 'A-Fib.com'...
"A-Fib.com is a great web site for patients, that is unequaled by anything else out there."
Dr. Douglas L. Packer, MD, FHRS, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
"Jill and I put you and your work in our prayers every night. What you do to help people through this [A-Fib] process is really incredible."
Jill and Steve Douglas, East Troy, WI
“I really appreciate all the information on your website as it allows me to be a better informed patient and to know what questions to ask my EP.
Faye Spencer, Boise, ID, April 2017
“I think your site has helped a lot of patients.”Dr. Hugh G. Calkins, MD Johns Hopkins,
Baltimore, MD
2021 AF Symposium
ATTEST Trial: Catheter Ablation to Modify Progression of AF
Dr. Karl-Heinz Kuck
Dr. Karl-Heinz Kuck of the Asklepios Klinik St. Georg in Hamburg, Germany, gave a presentation on the findings from the ATTEST Trial. (He also spoke on this topic at the 2020 AF Symposium).
Patient Risk: Progressing from Paroxysmal to Persistent A-Fib
Dr. Kuck pointed out that within one year, 4% to 15% of paroxysmal A-Fib patients become persistent.
In addition: they are at a higher risk of dying, they have more risk of stroke, and it’s more difficult to restore them to normal sinus rhythm. (In the Rocket AF trial, the mortality rate of persistent A-Fib was triple that of paroxysmal patients.)
The ATTEST Trial: RF Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drugs
The ATTEST clinical trial included 255 paroxysmal patients in 36 different study locations. They were older than 60 years and had to have been in A-Fib for at least 2 years (mean age 68). They had failed up to 2 antiarrhythmic drugs (either rate or rhythm control).
Patients were randomized to two groups: radiofrequency ablation (RF) (128) or antiarrhythmic drugs (127). They were followed for 3 years (ending in 2018).
ATTEST Findings
Significant data about the progression of A-Fib was learned from this trial.
• At 3 years, the rate of persistent A-Fib or atrial tachycardia was lower (2.4% ) in the RF group vs the antiarrhythmic drug group (17.5%).
• The RF group was approximately 10 times less likely to develop persistent A-Fib compared to the antiarrhythmic drug group.
• For patients in the antiarrhythmic drug group, 20.6% progressed to persistent A-Fib or atrial tachycardia compared to only 2.2% in the RF group.
• Recurrences occurred in 49% of the ablation group vs. 84% in the drug group. Repeat ablations were done on 17.1% of the ablation group.
Dr. Kuck’s Conclusions
Early radiofrequency ablation was superior to antiarrhythmic drugs to delay the progression to persistent atrial fibrillation among patients with paroxysmal A-Fib.
Dr. Kuck’s advice: “Ablate as early as possible.”
Editor’s Comments
The EAST-AFNET 4 Trial: The ATTEST Trial findings dovetailed with results from the EAST-AFNET 4 Trial.
Dr Paulus Kirchhof
In another ’21 AF Symposium presentation, Dr. Paulus Kirchoff (Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences, U. of Birmingham, UK) reported that EAST-AFNET 4 trial findings supported early initiation of rhythm therapy in cases of recent onset A-Fib. (See 2021 AF Symposium: EAST-AFNET 4 Trial—Early Rhythm Control Therapy in AF)
Research by both Dr. Kuck and Dr. Kirchhof came to the same conclusion: “ablate as early as possible” and the need for “early initiation of rhythm therapy.”
Why Risk Progressing into Persistent A-Fib? There are so many bad things that can happen to you when left in A-Fib. As Dr. Kuck points out, you’re at a higher risk of dying, there’s more risk of stroke, it’s more difficult to restore you to normal sinus rhythm.
And we haven’t even talked about heart damage from fibrosis, the risk of electrical remodeling of the heart, and the all-too-real dangers of taking antiarrhythmic drugs over time.
And what about quality of life? Who wants to live in A-Fib? There are few medical procedures so transformative and life changing as going from A-Fib to normal sinus rhythm.
Don’t Leave Someone in A-Fib―Ablate as Early as Possible: Dr. Kuck’s (and Dr. Kirchhof’s) research answers once and for all whether or not A-Fib patients should be left in A-Fib, whether seriously symptomatic or not (e.g., leaving A-Fib patients on rate control drugs but still in A-Fib.)
These patients are 10 times more likely to progress to persistent A-Fib. That’s why today’s Management of A-Fib Treatment Guidelines lists catheter ablation as a first-line choice. That is, A-Fib patients have the option of going directly to a catheter ablation.
Time for a Second Opinion? I occasionally hear of Cardiologists who refuse to refer patients for a catheter ablation, who tell patients a catheter ablation is unproven and dangerous. Not true!
When you hear something like that, it’s time to get a second opinion and/or change doctors.
Know Your Rights—Be Assertive: Your doctor may try to talk you into first trying antiarrhythmic meds before offering you the option of a catheter ablation.
As an A-Fib patient, know your rights and be assertive. According to the Management of Atrial Fibrillation Treatment guidelines, you have a right to choose catheter ablation as your first choice.
If you find any errors on this page, email us. Y Last updated: Friday, April 16, 2021
Return to 2021 AF Symposium Reports
