Scholarlink

Background <p>Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent cardiac arrhythmia in adults, with presentations from asymptomatic to severe cardiovascular morbidities. Cardiac ablation treats patients resistant to antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) using approaches such as bilateral surgical ablation, which permits targeting of superior vena cava lesions but entails longer procedures and higher complication risk, and hybrid ablation that combines epicardial and endocardial techniques.</p> Method <p>We performed a meta-analysis per PRISMA guidelines, including observational and interventional single-arm studies of patients undergoing bilateral surgical or hybrid ablation in single- and double-setting subgroups. Studies were selected by predefined criteria, and data were extracted independently by 12 investigators. Searches covered multiple databases up to March 29, 2025.</p> Result <p>Thirty-two studies with 1,871 patients were evaluated. Overall complication rates were 0.11 (95% CI: 0.08–0.14) for surgical ablation and 0.13 (95% CI: 0.095–0.17) for hybrid ablation, with no significant subgroup difference (<i>p</i> = 0.093). Arrhythmia-free rates were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.69–0.89) for surgical and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.70–0.85) for hybrid ablation (<i>p</i> = 0.305). Mean operative times were 160.9&#xa0;min (95% CI: 135 − 186.9) for surgical and 192.65&#xa0;min (95% CI: 109.3–275.9) for hybrid ablation (<i>p</i> = 0.069). Bleeding rates were 0.03 (95% CI: 0.02–0.04) and 0.049 (95% CI: 0.03–0.07), respectively (<i>p</i> = 0.06). Mortality, stroke, conversion to sternotomy, and hospital length of stay showed no significant differences.</p> Conclusion <p>Surgical ablation yielded a slightly higher arrhythmia-free rate and fewer total complications, while hybrid ablation had shorter operative time; subgroup (single vs. double setting) differences were not significant.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgical ablation and hybrid ablation in AF patients: results from a single-arm systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月7日

查看全文
  • Fouad Hanna,
  • Ali Dway,
  • Hamza A. Abdul-Hafez,
  • Yousef M. Husseiny,
  • Ahmed Youssef Hassan,
  • Mazen Negmeldin A. Yassin,
  • Basel Saber Hussein Ayoub,
  • Hadeel Jameel Ayesh,
  • Omneya Kandil,
  • Abdelrahman Elgendy,
  • Nada G. Hamam,
  • Abdelrahman El-Helbawy

摘要

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent cardiac arrhythmia in adults, with presentations from asymptomatic to severe cardiovascular morbidities. Cardiac ablation treats patients resistant to antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) using approaches such as bilateral surgical ablation, which permits targeting of superior vena cava lesions but entails longer procedures and higher complication risk, and hybrid ablation that combines epicardial and endocardial techniques.

Method

We performed a meta-analysis per PRISMA guidelines, including observational and interventional single-arm studies of patients undergoing bilateral surgical or hybrid ablation in single- and double-setting subgroups. Studies were selected by predefined criteria, and data were extracted independently by 12 investigators. Searches covered multiple databases up to March 29, 2025.

Result

Thirty-two studies with 1,871 patients were evaluated. Overall complication rates were 0.11 (95% CI: 0.08–0.14) for surgical ablation and 0.13 (95% CI: 0.095–0.17) for hybrid ablation, with no significant subgroup difference (p = 0.093). Arrhythmia-free rates were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.69–0.89) for surgical and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.70–0.85) for hybrid ablation (p = 0.305). Mean operative times were 160.9 min (95% CI: 135 − 186.9) for surgical and 192.65 min (95% CI: 109.3–275.9) for hybrid ablation (p = 0.069). Bleeding rates were 0.03 (95% CI: 0.02–0.04) and 0.049 (95% CI: 0.03–0.07), respectively (p = 0.06). Mortality, stroke, conversion to sternotomy, and hospital length of stay showed no significant differences.

Conclusion

Surgical ablation yielded a slightly higher arrhythmia-free rate and fewer total complications, while hybrid ablation had shorter operative time; subgroup (single vs. double setting) differences were not significant.