Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Improvement in quality of life after catheter ablation for paroxysmal versus long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: a prospective study with 3-year follow-up

V. Bulková, M. Fiala, S. Havránek, J. Simek, L. Skňouřil, J. Januška, J. Spinar, D. Wichterle,

. 2014 ; 3 (4) : . [pub] 20140718

Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu srovnávací studie, časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc15031953

BACKGROUND: Changes in quality of life (QoL) after catheter ablation for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) are not well described. We sought to compare QoL improvement after catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) versus that after LSPAF. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 261 PAF and 126 LSPAF ablation recipients were prospectively followed for arrhythmia recurrence, QoL, hospital stay, and sick leave. In PAF versus LSPAF groups, 1.3±0.6 versus 1.6±0.7 procedures were performed per patient (P<0.00001) during a 3-year follow-up. Good arrhythmia control was achieved in 86% versus 87% of patients (P=0.69) and in 69% versus 69% of patients not receiving antiarrhythmic drugs (P=0.99). The baseline QoL was better in the PAF than in the LSPAF group (European Quality of Life Group instrument self-report questionnaire visual analog scale: 66.4±14.2 versus 61.0±14.2, P=0.0005; European Quality of Life Group 3-level, 5-dimensional descriptive system: 71.4±9.2 versus 67.7±13.8, P=0.002). Postablation 3-year increase in QoL was significant in both groups (all P<0.00001) and significantly lower in PAF versus LSPAF patients (visual analog scale: +5.0±14.5 versus +10.2±12.8, P=0.001; descriptive system: +5.9±14.3 versus +9.3±13.9, P=0.03). In multivariate analysis, LSPAF, less advanced age, shorter history of AF and good arrhythmia control were consistently associated with postablation 3-year improvement in QoL. Days of hospital stay for cardiovascular reasons and days on sick leave per patient/year were significantly reduced in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with LSPAF had worse baseline QoL. The magnitude of QoL improvement after ablation of LSPAF was significantly greater compared with after ablation of PAF, particularly when good arrhythmia control was achieved without the use of antiarrhythmic drugs.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc15031953
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20160309112517.0
007      
ta
008      
151005s2014 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1161/JAHA.114.000881 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)25037195
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Bulková, Veronika $u Department of Cardiology and Angiology, St. Anne's University Hospital and International Clinical Research Center, Brno, Czech Republic (V.B.) Department of Cardiology and Angiology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic (V.B., H., J., D.W.).
245    10
$a Improvement in quality of life after catheter ablation for paroxysmal versus long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: a prospective study with 3-year follow-up / $c V. Bulková, M. Fiala, S. Havránek, J. Simek, L. Skňouřil, J. Januška, J. Spinar, D. Wichterle,
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Changes in quality of life (QoL) after catheter ablation for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) are not well described. We sought to compare QoL improvement after catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) versus that after LSPAF. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 261 PAF and 126 LSPAF ablation recipients were prospectively followed for arrhythmia recurrence, QoL, hospital stay, and sick leave. In PAF versus LSPAF groups, 1.3±0.6 versus 1.6±0.7 procedures were performed per patient (P<0.00001) during a 3-year follow-up. Good arrhythmia control was achieved in 86% versus 87% of patients (P=0.69) and in 69% versus 69% of patients not receiving antiarrhythmic drugs (P=0.99). The baseline QoL was better in the PAF than in the LSPAF group (European Quality of Life Group instrument self-report questionnaire visual analog scale: 66.4±14.2 versus 61.0±14.2, P=0.0005; European Quality of Life Group 3-level, 5-dimensional descriptive system: 71.4±9.2 versus 67.7±13.8, P=0.002). Postablation 3-year increase in QoL was significant in both groups (all P<0.00001) and significantly lower in PAF versus LSPAF patients (visual analog scale: +5.0±14.5 versus +10.2±12.8, P=0.001; descriptive system: +5.9±14.3 versus +9.3±13.9, P=0.03). In multivariate analysis, LSPAF, less advanced age, shorter history of AF and good arrhythmia control were consistently associated with postablation 3-year improvement in QoL. Days of hospital stay for cardiovascular reasons and days on sick leave per patient/year were significantly reduced in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with LSPAF had worse baseline QoL. The magnitude of QoL improvement after ablation of LSPAF was significantly greater compared with after ablation of PAF, particularly when good arrhythmia control was achieved without the use of antiarrhythmic drugs.
650    _2
$a činnosti denního života $7 D000203
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a úzkost $7 D001007
650    _2
$a fibrilace síní $x patofyziologie $x chirurgie $7 D001281
650    12
$a katetrizační ablace $7 D017115
650    _2
$a kohortové studie $7 D015331
650    _2
$a deprese $7 D003863
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a následné studie $7 D005500
650    _2
$a hospitalizace $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D006760
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a prospektivní studie $7 D011446
650    12
$a kvalita života $7 D011788
650    _2
$a recidiva $7 D012008
650    _2
$a pracovní neschopnost $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D018582
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Fiala, Martin $u Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, University Hospital, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic (M.F., J.) Department of Cardiology, Hospital Podlesí, Třinec, Czech Republic (M.F., L., J.J.).
700    1_
$a Havránek, Stěpán $u Department of Cardiology and Angiology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic (V.B., H., J., D.W.).
700    1_
$a Simek, Jan $u Department of Cardiology and Angiology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic (V.B., H., J., D.W.).
700    1_
$a Skňouřil, Libor $u Department of Cardiology, Hospital Podlesí, Třinec, Czech Republic (M.F., L., J.J.).
700    1_
$a Januška, Jaroslav $u Department of Cardiology, Hospital Podlesí, Třinec, Czech Republic (M.F., L., J.J.).
700    1_
$a Spinar, Jindřich $u Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, University Hospital, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic (M.F., J.).
700    1_
$a Wichterle, Dan $u Department of Cardiology and Angiology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic (V.B., H., J., D.W.).
773    0_
$w MED00188127 $t Journal of the American Heart Association $x 2047-9980 $g Roč. 3, č. 4 (2014)
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25037195 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20151005 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20160309112532 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1092829 $s 915079
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2014 $b 3 $c 4 $e 20140718 $i 2047-9980 $m Journal of the American Heart Association $n J Am Heart Assoc $x MED00188127
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20151005

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace