Ablation Versus Amiodarone for Treatment of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Congestive Heart Failure and an Implanted Device: Results From the AATAC Multicenter Randomized Trial

Luigi Di Biase, Prasant Mohanty, Sanghamitra Mohanty, Pasquale Santangeli, Chintan Trivedi, Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy, Madhu Reddy, Pierre Jais, Sakis Themistoclakis, Antonio Dello Russo, Michela Casella, Gemma Pelargonio, Maria Lucia Narducci, Robert Schweikert, Petr Neuzil, Javier Sanchez, Rodney Horton, Salwa Beheiry, Richard Hongo, Steven HaoAntonio Rossillo, Giovanni Forleo, Claudio Tondo, J. David Burkhardt, Michel Haissaguerre, Andrea Natale

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background - Whether catheter ablation (CA) is superior to amiodarone (AMIO) for the treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure is unknown. Methods and Results - This was an open-label, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study. Patients with persistent AF, dual-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator, New York Heart Association II to III, and left ventricular ejection fraction

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1637-1644
Number of pages8
JournalCirculation
Volume133
Issue number17
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 26 2016

Keywords

  • amiodarone
  • atrial fibrillation
  • catheter ablation
  • heart failure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology (medical)
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Ablation Versus Amiodarone for Treatment of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Congestive Heart Failure and an Implanted Device: Results From the AATAC Multicenter Randomized Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this