4.0 Review

Impact of metabolic syndrome on the risk of atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation: systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10840-013-9863-x

关键词

Pulmonary vein isolation; Syndrome X; Glucose intolerance; Hyperlipidemia; Insulin resistance

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute [R01 HL094555]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The impact of metabolic syndrome (MetS) on recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis to summarize the relative risks (RR) of AF recurrence after catheter ablation in patients with vs. without MetS and its components. Among 839 articles identified from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, we included 23 studies with a total of 12,924 patients (7,594 with paroxysmal AF and 5,330 with nonparoxysmal AF) for analysis. Five of these had complete information on MetS components. Variables assessed comprised study design and population characteristics, AF ablation methods, use of anti-arrhythmic drugs, AF recurrence ascertainment methods, adjustment variables, and other quality indicators. Our meta-analysis found an elevated risk of AF recurrence after ablation in patients with vs. without MetS (pooled RR, 1.63; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.25-2.12). Among components of MetS, hypertension was a predictor of AF post-ablation recurrence in studies without adjustment for other MetS components (RR, 1.62; 95 % CI, 1.23-2.13) but not in those adjusting for two or more additional MetS components (RR, 1.03; 95 % CI, 0.88-1.20). There was a borderline association between overweight/obesity and AF recurrence after ablation (RR, 1.27; 95 % CI, 0.99-1.64). MetS is associated with an increased risk of AF recurrence after catheter ablation. Further study of the MetS and its components as determinants of AF risk could help refine patient selection and improve procedural outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据