Regional differences in outcomes with ablation versus drug therapy for atrial fibrillation: Results from the CABANA trial.

BACKGROUND: The finding of unexpected variations in treatment benefits by geographic region in international clinical trials raises complex questions about the interpretation and generalizability of trial findings. We observed such geographical variations in outcome and in the effectiveness of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation versus drug therapy in the Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation (CABANA) trial. This paper describes these differences and investigates potential causes. METHODS: The examination of treatment effects by geographic region was a prespecified analysis. CABANA enrolled patients from 10 countries, with 1,285 patients at 85 North American (NA) sites and 919 at 41 non-NA sites. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Death and first atrial fibrillation recurrence were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: At least 1 primary endpoint event occurred in 157 patients (12.2%) from NA and 33 (3.6%) from non-NA sites over a median 54.9 and 40.5 months of follow-up, respectively (NA/non-NA adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48-3.21, P < .001). In NA patients, 78 events occurred in the ablation and 79 in the drug arm, (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.66, 1.24) while 11 and 22 events occurred in non-NA patients (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.25,1.05, interaction P = .154). Death occurred in 53 ablation and 51 drug therapy patients in the NA group (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65,1.42) and in 5 ablation and 16 drug therapy patients in the non-NA group (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12,0.86, interaction P = .044). Adjusting for baseline regional differences or prognostic risk variables did not account for the regional differences in treatment effects. Atrial fibrillation recurrence was reduced by ablation in both regions (NA: HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46, 0.63; non-NA: HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30, 0.64, interaction P = .322). CONCLUSIONS: In CABANA, primary outcome events occurred significantly more often in the NA group but assignment to ablation significantly reduced all-cause mortality in the non-NA group only. These differences were not explained by regional variations in procedure effectiveness, safety, or patient characteristics. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0091150; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00911508.

Association Between Age and Outcomes of Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: Results From the CABANA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Observational data suggest that catheter ablation may be safe and effective to treat younger and older patients with atrial fibrillation. No large, randomized trial has examined this issue. This report describes outcomes according to age at entry in the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation). METHODS: Patients with atrial fibrillation ≥65 years of age, or <65 with ≥1 risk factor for stroke, were randomly assigned to catheter ablation versus drug therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, the composite of mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, and recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Treatment effect estimates were adjusted for baseline covariables using proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: Of 2204 patients randomly assigned in CABANA, 766 (34.8%) were <65 years of age, 1130 (51.3%) were 65 to 74 years of age, and 308 (14.0%) were ≥75 years of age. Catheter ablation was associated with a 43% reduction in the primary outcome for patients <65 years of age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.57 [95% CI, 0.30-1.09]), a 21% reduction for 65 to 74 years of age (aHR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.54-1.16]), and an indeterminate effect for age ≥75 years of age (aHR, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.75-2.58]). Four-year event rates for ablation versus drug therapy across age groups, respectively, were 3.2% versus 7.8%, 7.8% versus 9.6%, and 14.8% versus 9.0%. For every 10-year increase in age, the primary outcome aHR increased (ie, less favorable to ablation) an average of 27% (interaction P value=0.215). A similar pattern was seen with all-cause mortality: for every 10-year increase in age, the aHR increased an average of 46% (interaction P value=0.111). Atrial fibrillation recurrence rates were lower with ablation than with drug therapy across age subgroups (aHR 0.47, 0.58, and 0.49, respectively). Treatment-related complications were infrequent for both arms (<3%) regardless of age. CONCLUSIONS: We found age-based variations in clinical outcomes for catheter ablation compared with drug therapy, with the largest relative and absolute benefits of catheter ablation in younger patients. No prognostic benefits for ablation were seen in the oldest patients. No differences were found by age in treatment-related complications or in the relative effectiveness of catheter ablation in preventing recurrent atrial arrhythmias. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT00911508.

Cost-Effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: The CABANA Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation), catheter ablation did not significantly reduce the primary end point of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest compared with drug therapy by intention-to-treat, but did improve the quality of life and freedom from atrial fibrillation recurrence. In the heart failure subgroup, ablation improved both survival and quality of life. Cost-effectiveness was a prespecified CABANA secondary end point. METHODS: Medical resource use data were collected for all CABANA patients (N=2204). Costs for hospital-based care were assigned using prospectively collected bills from US patients (n=1171); physician and medication costs were assigned using the Medicare Fee Schedule and National Average Drug Acquisition Costs, respectively. Extrapolated life expectancies were estimated using age-based survival models. Quality-of-life adjustments were based on EQ-5D-based utilities measured during the trial. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, comparing ablation with drug therapy on the basis of intention-to-treat, and assessed from the US health care sector perspective. RESULTS: Costs in the first 3 months averaged $20 794±SD 1069 higher with ablation compared with drug therapy. The cumulative within-trial 5-year cost difference was $19 245 (95% CI, $11 360-$27 170) and the lifetime mean cost difference was $15 516 (95% CI, -$2963 to $35,512) higher with ablation than with drug therapy. The drug therapy arm accrued an average of 12.5 life-years (LYs) and 10.7 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). For the ablation arm, the corresponding estimates were 12.6 LYs and 11.0 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $57 893 per QALY gained, with 75% of bootstrap replications yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$100 000 per QALY gained. With no quality-of-life/utility adjustments, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $183 318 per LY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation was economically attractive compared with drug therapy in the CABANA Trial overall at present benchmarks for health care value in the United States on the basis of projected incremental QALYs but not LYs alone.

Ablation Versus Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure: Results From the CABANA Trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation (AF), several clinical trials have reported improved outcomes, including freedom from AF recurrence, quality of life, and survival, with catheter ablation. This article describes the treatment-related outcomes of the AF patients with heart failure enrolled in the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation). METHODS: The CABANA trial randomized 2204 patients with AF who were ≥65 years old or <65 years old with ≥1 risk factor for stroke at 126 sites to ablation with pulmonary vein isolation or drug therapy including rate or rhythm control drugs. Of these, 778 (35%) had New York Heart Association class >II at baseline and form the subject of this article. The CABANA trial's primary end point was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. RESULTS: Of the 778 patients with heart failure enrolled in CABANA, 378 were assigned to ablation and 400 to drug therapy. Ejection fraction at baseline was available for 571 patients (73.0%), and 9.3% of these had an ejection fraction <40%, whereas 11.7% had ejection fractions between 40% and 50%. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the ablation arm had a 36% relative reduction in the primary composite end point (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.41-0.99]) and a 43% relative reduction in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.33-0.96]) compared with drug therapy alone over a median follow-up of 48.5 months. AF recurrence was decreased with ablation (hazard ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.42-0.74]). The adjusted mean difference for the AFEQT (Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life) summary score averaged over the entire 60-month follow-up was 5.0 points, favoring the ablation arm (95% CI, 2.5-7.4 points), and the MAFSI (Mayo Atrial Fibrillation-Specific Symptom Inventory) frequency score difference was -2.0 points, favoring ablation (95% CI, -2.9 to -1.2). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF enrolled in the CABANA trial who had clinically diagnosed stable heart failure at trial entry, catheter ablation produced clinically important improvements in survival, freedom from AF recurrence, and quality of life relative to drug therapy. These results, obtained in a cohort most of whom had preserved left ventricular function, require independent trial verification. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00911508; Unique identifier: NCT0091150.

Myocardial Viability and Long-Term Outcomes in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: The role of assessment of myocardial viability in identifying patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy who might benefit from surgical revascularization remains controversial. Furthermore, although improvement in left ventricular function is one of the goals of revascularization, its relationship to subsequent outcomes is unclear. METHODS: Among 601 patients who had coronary artery disease that was amenable to coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) and who had a left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or lower, we prospectively assessed myocardial viability using single-photon-emission computed tomography, dobutamine echocardiography, or both. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo CABG and receive medical therapy or to receive medical therapy alone. Left ventricular ejection fraction was measured at baseline and after 4 months of follow-up in 318 patients. The primary end point was death from any cause. The median duration of follow-up was 10.4 years. RESULTS: CABG plus medical therapy was associated with a lower incidence of death from any cause than medical therapy alone (182 deaths among 298 patients in the CABG group vs. 209 deaths among 303 patients in the medical-therapy group; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.60 to 0.90). However, no significant interaction was observed between the presence or absence of myocardial viability and the beneficial effect of CABG plus medical therapy over medical therapy alone (P = 0.34 for interaction). An increase in left ventricular ejection fraction was observed only among patients with myocardial viability, irrespective of treatment assignment. There was no association between changes in left ventricular ejection fraction and subsequent death. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study do not support the concept that myocardial viability is associated with a long-term benefit of CABG in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. The presence of viable myocardium was associated with improvement in left ventricular systolic function, irrespective of treatment, but such improvement was not related to long-term survival. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; STICH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00023595.).

Influence of atrial fibrillation type on outcomes of ablation vs. drug therapy: results from CABANA.

AIMS: Influence of atrial fibrillation (AF) type on outcomes seen with catheter ablation vs. drug therapy is incompletely understood. This study assesses the impact of AF type on treatment outcomes in the Catheter Ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation Trial (CABANA). METHODS AND RESULTS: CABANA randomized 2204 patients ≥65 years old or <65 with at least one risk factor for stroke to catheter ablation or drug therapy. Of these, 946 (42.9%) had paroxysmal AF (PAF), 1042 (47.3%) had persistent AF (PersAF), and 215 (9.8%) had long-standing persistent AF (LSPAF) at baseline. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Symptoms were measured with the Mayo AF-Specific Symptom Inventory (MAFSI), and quality of life was measured with the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT). Comparisons are reported by intention to treat. Compared with drug therapy alone, catheter ablation produced a 19% relative risk reduction in the primary endpoint for PAF {adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.81 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50, 1.30]}, and a 17% relative reduction for PersAF (aHR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.56, 1.22). For LSPAF, the ablation relative effect was a 7% reduction (aHR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.36, 2.44). Ablation was more effective than drug therapy at reducing first AF recurrence in all AF types: by 51% for PAF (aHR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39, 0.62), by 47% for PersAF (aHR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.43,0.65), and by 36% for LSPAF (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41,1.00). Ablation was associated with greater improvement in symptoms, with the mean difference between groups in the MAFSI frequency score favouring ablation over 5 years of follow-up in all subgroups: PAF had a clinically significant -1.9-point difference (95% CI: -1.2 to -2.6); PersAF a -0.9 difference (95% CI: -0.2 to -1.6); LSPAF a clinically significant difference of -1.6 points (95% CI: -0.1 to -3.1). Ablation was also associated with greater improvement in quality of life in all subgroups, with the AFEQT overall score in PAF patients showing a clinically significant 5.3-point improvement (95% CI: 3.3 to 7.3) over drug therapy alone over 5 years of follow-up, PersAF a 1.7-point difference (95% CI: 0.0 to 3.7), and LSPAF a 3.1-point difference (95% CI: -1.6 to 7.8). CONCLUSION: Prognostic treatment effects of catheter ablation compared with drug therapy on the primary and major secondary clinical endpoints did not differ consequentially by AF subtype. With regard to decreases in AF recurrence and improving quality of life, ablation was more effective than drug therapy in all three AF type subgroups. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00911508.

Incremental prognostic value of echocardiography of left ventricular remodeling and diastolic function in STICH trial.

AIMS: We sought to determine which echocardiographic markers of left ventricular (LV) remodeling and diastolic dysfunction can contribute as incremental and independent prognostic information in addition to current clinical risk markers of ischemic LV systolic dysfunction in the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 1511 of 2136 patients in STICH for whom baseline transmitral Doppler (E/A ratio) could be measured by an echocardiographic core laboratory blinded to treatment and outcomes, and prognostic value of echocardiographic variables was determined by a Cox regression model. E/A ratio was the most significant predictor of mortality amongst diastolic variables with lowest mortality for E/A closest 0.8, although mortality was consistently low for E/A 0.6 to 1.0. Mortality increased for E/A < 0.6 and > 1.0 up to approximately 2.3, beyond which there was no further increase in risk. Larger LV end-systolic volume index (LVESVI) and E/A < 0.6 and > 1.0 had incremental negative effects on mortality when added to a clinical multivariable model, where creatinine, LVESVI, age, and E/A ratio accounted for 74% of the prognostic information for predicting risk. LVESVI and E/A ratio were stronger predictors of prognosis than New York Heart Association functional class, anemia, diabetes, history of atrial fibrillation, and stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Echocardiographic markers of advanced LV remodeling and diastolic dysfunction added incremental prognostic value to current clinical risk markers. LVESVI and E/A ratio outperformed other markers and should be considered as standard in assessing risks in ischemic heart failure. E/A closest to 0.8 was the most optimal filling pattern.

Sex Difference in Patients With Ischemic Heart Failure Undergoing Surgical Revascularization: Results From the STICH Trial (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure).

BACKGROUND: Female sex is conventionally considered a risk factor for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and has been included as a poor prognostic factor in multiple cardiac operative risk evaluation scores. We aimed to investigate the association of sex and the long-term benefit of CABG in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction enrolled in the prospective STICH trial (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure Study). METHODS: The STICH trial randomized 1212 patients (148 [12%] women and 1064 [88%] men) with coronary artery disease and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% to CABG+medical therapy (MED) versus MED alone. Long-term (10-year) outcomes with each treatment were compared according to sex. RESULTS: At baseline, women were older (63.4 versus 59.3 years; P=0.016) with higher body mass index (27.9 versus 26.7 kg/m2; P=0.001). Women had more coronary artery disease risk factors (diabetes mellitus, 55.4% versus 37.2%; hypertension, 70.9% versus 58.6%; hyperlipidemia, 70.3% versus 58.9%) except for smoking (13.5% versus 21.8%) and had lower rates of prior CABG (0% versus 3.4%; all P<0.05) than men. Moreover, women had higher New York Heart Association class (class III/IV, 66.2% versus 57.0%), lower 6-minute walk capacity (300 versus 350 m), and lower Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary scores (51 versus 63; all P<0.05). Over 10 years of follow-up, all-cause mortality (49.0% versus 65.8%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.86; P=0.002) and cardiovascular mortality (34.3% versus 52.3%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.89; P=0.006) were significantly lower in women compared with men. With randomization to CABG+MED versus MED treatment, there was no significant interaction between sex and treatment group in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or the composite of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization (all P>0.05). In addition, surgical deaths were not statistically different (1.5% versus 5.1%; P=0.187) between sexes among patients randomized to CABG per protocol as initial treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Sex is not associated with the effect of CABG+MED versus MED on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, the composite of death or cardiovascular hospitalization, or surgical deaths in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Thus, sex should not influence treatment decisions about CABG in these patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00023595.

Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients with Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: The survival benefit of a strategy of coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) added to guideline-directed medical therapy, as compared with medical therapy alone, in patients with coronary artery disease, heart failure, and severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction remains unclear. METHODS: From July 2002 to May 2007, a total of 1212 patients with an ejection fraction of 35% or less and coronary artery disease amenable to CABG were randomly assigned to undergo CABG plus medical therapy (CABG group, 610 patients) or medical therapy alone (medical-therapy group, 602 patients). The primary outcome was death from any cause. Major secondary outcomes included death from cardiovascular causes and death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes. The median duration of follow-up, including the current extended-follow-up study, was 9.8 years. RESULTS: A primary outcome event occurred in 359 patients (58.9%) in the CABG group and in 398 patients (66.1%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio with CABG vs. medical therapy, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.97; P=0.02 by log-rank test). A total of 247 patients (40.5%) in the CABG group and 297 patients (49.3%) in the medical-therapy group died from cardiovascular causes (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; P=0.006 by log-rank test). Death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes occurred in 467 patients (76.6%) in the CABG group and in 524 patients (87.0%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.82; P<0.001 by log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, the rates of death from any cause, death from cardiovascular causes, and death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes were significantly lower over 10 years among patients who underwent CABG in addition to receiving medical therapy than among those who received medical therapy alone. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; STICH [and STICHES] ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00023595.).

Sex differences in management and outcomes of patients with stable symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease: Insights from the PROMISE trial.

BACKGROUND: Although sex differences exist in the management of acute coronary syndromes, less is known about the management and outcomes of women and men with suspected coronary artery disease being evaluated with noninvasive testing (NIT). METHODS: We investigated sex-based differences in NIT results and subsequent clinical management in 4,720 women and 4,246 men randomized to CT angiography versus stress testing in the PROMISE trial. Logistic regression models assessed relationships between sex and referral for catheterization, revascularization, and aspirin or statin use. Cox regression models assessed the relationship between sex and the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina. RESULTS: Women more often had normal NITs than men (61.0% vs 49.6%, P < .001) and less often had mild (29.3% vs 35.4%, P < .001), moderate (4.0% vs 6.8%, P < .001), or severe abnormalities (5.7% vs 8.3%, P < .001) found on NIT. Women were less likely to be referred for catheterization than men (7.6% vs 12.6%, adjusted OR 0.75 [0.62-0.90]; P = .002). Of those who underwent catheterization within 90 days of randomization (358 women, 534 men), fewer women than men had obstructive coronary artery disease (40.8% vs 60.9%, P < .001). At a 60-day visit, women were significantly less likely than men to report statin use when indicated (adjusted OR 0.81 [0.73-0.91]; P < .001) but were similarly likely to report aspirin use when indicated (adjusted OR 0.78 [0.56-1.08]; P = .13). Over a median follow-up of 25 months, women had better outcomes than men (adjusted OR 0.73 [0.57-0.94]; P = .017). CONCLUSIONS: Although women more frequently had normal NITs compared with men, those with abnormalities on NIT were less likely to be referred for catheterization or to receive statin therapy. The high rates of negative NIT in women, coupled with the better outcomes compared with men, strongly support the need for a sex-specific algorithm to guide NIT and chest pain management.

The association between blood pressure and long-term outcomes of patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy with and without surgical revascularization: an analysis of the STICH trial.

Aims: Hypertension (HTN) is a well-known contributor to cardiovascular disease, including heart failure (HF) and coronary artery disease, and is the leading risk factor for premature death world-wide. A J- or U-shaped relationship has been suggested between blood pressure (BP) and clinical outcomes in different studies. However, there is little information about the significance of BP on the outcomes of patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. This study aimed to determine the relationship between BP and mortality outcomes in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy. Methods and results: The influence of BP during a median follow-up of 9.8 years was studied in a total of 1212 patients with ejection fraction ≤35% and coronary disease amenable to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) who were randomized to CABG or medical therapy alone (MED) in the STICH (Surgical Treatment for Ischaemic Heart Failure) trial. Landmark analyses were performed starting at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years after randomization, in which previous systolic BP values were averaged and related to subsequent mortality through the end of follow-up with a median of 9.8 years. Neither a previous history of HTN nor baseline BP had any significant influence on long-term mortality outcomes, nor did they have a significant interaction with MED or CABG treatment. The landmark analyses showed a progressive U-shaped relationship that became strongest at 5 years (χ2 and P-values: 7.08, P = 0.069; 8.72, P = 0.033; 9.86; P = 0.020; 8.31, P = 0.040; 14.52, P = 0.002; at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5-year landmark analyses, respectively). The relationship between diastolic BP (DBP) and outcomes was similar. The most favourable outcomes were observed in the SBP range 120-130, and DBP 75-85 mmHg, whereas lower and higher BP were associated with worse outcomes. There were no differences in BP-lowering medications between groups. Conclusion: A strong U-shaped relationship between BP and mortality outcomes was evident in ischaemic HF patients. The results imply that the optimal SBP might be in the range 120-130 mmHg after intervention, and possibly be subject to pharmacologic action regarding high BP. Further, low BP was a marker of poor outcomes that might require other interactions and treatment strategies. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00023595.

Effect of Catheter Ablation vs Medical Therapy on Quality of Life Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The CABANA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Catheter ablation is more effective than drug therapy in restoring sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but its incremental effect on long-term quality of life (QOL) is uncertain. Objective: To determine whether catheter ablation is more beneficial than conventional drug therapy for improving QOL in patients with AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: An open-label randomized clinical trial of catheter ablation vs drug therapy in 2204 symptomatic patients with AF older than 65 years or 65 years or younger with at least 1 risk factor for stroke. Patients were enrolled from November 2009 to April 2016 from 126 centers in 10 countries. Follow-up ended in December 2017. Interventions: Pulmonary vein isolation, with additional ablation procedures at the discretion of the investigators, for the catheter ablation group (n = 1108) and standard rhythm and/or rate-control drugs selected and managed by investigators for the drug therapy group (n = 1096). Main Outcomes and Measures: Prespecified co-primary QOL end points at 12 months, including the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT) summary score (range, 0-100; 0 indicates complete disability and 100 indicates no disability; patient-level clinically important difference, ≥5 points) and the Mayo AF-Specific Symptom Inventory (MAFSI) frequency score (range, 0-40; 0 indicates no symptoms and 40 indicates the most severe symptoms; patient-level clinically important difference, ≤-1.6 points) and severity score (range, 0-30; 0 indicates no symptoms and 30 indicates the most severe symptoms; patient-level clinically important difference, ≤-1.3 points). Results: Among 2204 randomized patients (median age, 68 years; 1385 patients [63%] were men, 946 [43%] had paroxysmal AF, and 1256 [57%] had persistent AF), the median follow-up was 48.5 months, and 1968 (89%) completed the trial. The mean AFEQT summary score was more favorable in the catheter ablation group than the drug therapy group at 12 months (86.4 points vs 80.9 points) (adjusted difference, 5.3 points [95% CI, 3.7-6.9]; P < .001). The mean MAFSI frequency score was more favorable for the catheter ablation group than the drug therapy group at 12 months (6.4 points vs 8.1 points) (adjusted difference, -1.7 points [95% CI, -2.3 to -1.2]; P < .001) and the mean MAFSI severity score was more favorable for the catheter ablation group than the drug therapy group at 12 months (5.0 points vs 6.5 points) (adjusted difference, -1.5 points [95% CI, -2.0 to -1.1]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation, catheter ablation, compared with medical therapy, led to clinically important and significant improvements in quality of life at 12 months. These findings can help guide decisions regarding management of atrial fibrillation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00911508.

Effect of Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy on Mortality, Stroke, Bleeding, and Cardiac Arrest Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The CABANA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Catheter ablation is effective in restoring sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation (AF), but its effects on long-term mortality and stroke risk are uncertain. Objective: To determine whether catheter ablation is more effective than conventional medical therapy for improving outcomes in AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation trial is an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicenter, randomized trial involving 126 centers in 10 countries. A total of 2204 symptomatic patients with AF aged 65 years and older or younger than 65 years with 1 or more risk factors for stroke were enrolled from November 2009 to April 2016, with follow-up through December 31, 2017. Interventions: The catheter ablation group (n = 1108) underwent pulmonary vein isolation, with additional ablative procedures at the discretion of site investigators. The drug therapy group (n = 1096) received standard rhythm and/or rate control drugs guided by contemporaneous guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Among 13 prespecified secondary end points, 3 are included in this report: all-cause mortality; total mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization; and AF recurrence. Results: Of the 2204 patients randomized (median age, 68 years; 37.2% female; 42.9% had paroxysmal AF and 57.1% had persistent AF), 89.3% completed the trial. Of the patients assigned to catheter ablation, 1006 (90.8%) underwent the procedure. Of the patients assigned to drug therapy, 301 (27.5%) ultimately received catheter ablation. In the intention-to-treat analysis, over a median follow-up of 48.5 months, the primary end point occurred in 8.0% (n = 89) of patients in the ablation group vs 9.2% (n = 101) of patients in the drug therapy group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65-1.15]; P = .30). Among the secondary end points, outcomes in the ablation group vs the drug therapy group, respectively, were 5.2% vs 6.1% for all-cause mortality (HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.60-1.21]; P = .38), 51.7% vs 58.1% for death or cardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.74-0.93]; P = .001), and 49.9% vs 69.5% for AF recurrence (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.45-0.60]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with AF, the strategy of catheter ablation, compared with medical therapy, did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. However, the estimated treatment effect of catheter ablation was affected by lower-than-expected event rates and treatment crossovers, which should be considered in interpreting the results of the trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00911508.

Prognostic Value of Coronary Artery Calcium in the PROMISE Study (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain).

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is an established predictor of future major adverse atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in asymptomatic individuals. However, limited data exist as to how CAC compares with functional testing (FT) in estimating prognosis in symptomatic patients. METHODS: In the PROMISE trial (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain), patients with stable chest pain (or dyspnea) and intermediate pretest probability for obstructive coronary artery disease were randomized to FT (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress, or stress echocardiography) or anatomic testing. We evaluated those who underwent CAC testing as part of the anatomic evaluation (n=4209) and compared that with results of FT (n=4602). We stratified CAC and FT results as normal or mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal (for CAC: 0, 1-99 Agatston score [AS], 100-400 AS, and >400 AS, respectively; for FT: normal, mild=late positive treadmill, moderate=early positive treadmill or single-vessel ischemia, and severe=large ischemic region abnormality). The primary end point was all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina hospitalization over a median follow-up of 26.1 months. Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and C statistics to determine predictive and discriminatory values. RESULTS: Overall, the distribution of normal or mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal test results was significantly different between FT and CAC (FT: normal, n=3588 [78.0%]; mild, n=432 [9.4%]; moderate, n=217 [4.7%]; severe, n=365 [7.9%]; CAC: normal, n=1457 [34.6%]; mild, n=1340 [31.8%]; moderate, n=772 [18.3%]; severe, n=640 [15.2%]; P<0.0001). Moderate and severe abnormalities in both arms robustly predicted events (moderate: CAC: HR, 3.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.81-5.44; and FT: HR, 2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.46-4.83; severe: CAC: HR, 3.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.99-6.36; and FT: HR, 3.88; 95% confidence interval, 2.58-5.85). In the CAC arm, the majority of events (n=112 of 133, 84%) occurred in patients with any positive CAC test (score >0), whereas fewer than half of events occurred in patients with mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal FT (n=57 of 132, 43%; P<0.001). In contrast, any abnormality on FT was significantly more specific for predicting events (78.6% for FT versus 35.2% for CAC; P<0.001). Overall discriminatory ability in predicting the primary end point of mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and unstable angina hospitalization was similar and fair for both CAC and FT (C statistic, 0.67 versus 0.64). Coronary computed tomographic angiography provided significantly better prognostic information compared with FT and CAC testing (C index, 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: Among stable outpatients presenting with suspected coronary artery disease, most patients experiencing clinical events have measurable CAC at baseline, and fewer than half have any abnormalities on FT. However, an abnormal FT was more specific for cardiovascular events, leading to overall similarly modest discriminatory abilities of both tests. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01174550.

Sudden Cardiac Death in Patients With Ischemic Heart Failure Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Results From the STICH Randomized Clinical Trial (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure).

BACKGROUND: The risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with heart failure after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) has not been examined in a contemporary clinical trial of surgical revascularization. This analysis describes the incidence, timing, and clinical predictors of SCD after CABG. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the STICH trial (Surgical Treatment of Ischemic Heart Failure) who underwent CABG with or without surgical ventricular reconstruction were included. We excluded patients with prior implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and those randomized only to medical therapy. The primary outcome was SCD as adjudicated by a blinded committee. A Cox model was used to examine and identify predictors of SCD. The Fine and Gray method was used to estimate the incidence of SCD accounting for the competing risk of other deaths. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 46 months, 113 of 1411 patients who received CABG without (n = 934) or with (n = 477) surgical ventricular reconstruction had SCD; 311 died of other causes. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction at enrollment was 28±9%. The 5-year cumulative incidence of SCD was 8.5%. Patients who had SCD and those who did not die were younger and had fewer comorbid conditions than did those who died of causes other than SCD. In the first 30 days after CABG, SCD (n=5) accounted for 7% of all deaths. The numerically greatest monthly rate of SCD was in the 31- to 90-day time period. In a multivariable analysis including baseline demographics, risk factors, coronary anatomy, and left ventricular function, end-systolic volume index and B-type natriuretic peptide were most strongly associated with SCD. CONCLUSIONS: The monthly risk of SCD shortly after CABG among patients with a low left ventricular ejection fraction is highest between the first and third months, suggesting that risk stratification for SCD should occur early in the postoperative period, particularly in patients with increased preoperative end-systolic volume index or B-type natriuretic peptide. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT0002359.

Prognostic Value of Noninvasive Cardiovascular Testing in Patients With Stable Chest Pain: Insights From the PROMISE Trial (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain).

BACKGROUND: Optimal management of patients with stable chest pain relies on the prognostic information provided by noninvasive cardiovascular testing, but there are limited data from randomized trials comparing anatomic with functional testing. METHODS: In the PROMISE trial (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain), patients with stable chest pain and intermediate pretest probability for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) were randomly assigned to functional testing (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress, or stress echocardiography) or coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA). Site-based diagnostic test reports were classified as normal or mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal. The primary end point was death, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina hospitalizations over a median follow-up of 26.1 months. RESULTS: Both the prevalence of normal test results and incidence rate of events in these patients were significantly lower among 4500 patients randomly assigned to CTA in comparison with 4602 patients randomly assigned to functional testing (33.4% versus 78.0%, and 0.9% versus 2.1%, respectively; both P<0.001). In CTA, 54.0% of events (n=74/137) occurred in patients with nonobstructive CAD (1%-69% stenosis). Prevalence of obstructive CAD and myocardial ischemia was low (11.9% versus 12.7%, respectively), with both findings having similar prognostic value (hazard ratio, 3.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.60-5.39; and 3.47; 95% CI, 2.42-4.99). When test findings were stratified as mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal, hazard ratios for events in comparison with normal tests increased proportionally for CTA (2.94, 7.67, 10.13; all P<0.001) but not for corresponding functional testing categories (0.94 [P=0.87], 2.65 [P=0.001], 3.88 [P<0.001]). The discriminatory ability of CTA in predicting events was significantly better than functional testing (c-index, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.68-0.76 versus 0.64; 95% CI, 0.59-0.69; P=0.04). If 2714 patients with at least an intermediate Framingham Risk Score (>10%) who had a normal functional test were reclassified as being mildly abnormal, the discriminatory capacity improved to 0.69 (95% CI, 0.64-0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Coronary CTA, by identifying patients at risk because of nonobstructive CAD, provides better prognostic information than functional testing in contemporary patients who have stable chest pain with a low burden of obstructive CAD, myocardial ischemia, and events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01174550.

Outcomes of anatomical versus functional testing for coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Many patients have symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease (CAD) and are often evaluated with the use of diagnostic testing, although there are limited data from randomized trials to guide care. METHODS: We randomly assigned 10,003 symptomatic patients to a strategy of initial anatomical testing with the use of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) or to functional testing (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress testing, or stress echocardiography). The composite primary end point was death, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, or major procedural complication. Secondary end points included invasive cardiac catheterization that did not show obstructive CAD and radiation exposure. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 60.8±8.3 years, 52.7% were women, and 87.7% had chest pain or dyspnea on exertion. The mean pretest likelihood of obstructive CAD was 53.3±21.4%. Over a median follow-up period of 25 months, a primary end-point event occurred in 164 of 4996 patients in the CTA group (3.3%) and in 151 of 5007 (3.0%) in the functional-testing group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.29; P=0.75). CTA was associated with fewer catheterizations showing no obstructive CAD than was functional testing (3.4% vs. 4.3%, P=0.02), although more patients in the CTA group underwent catheterization within 90 days after randomization (12.2% vs. 8.1%). The median cumulative radiation exposure per patient was lower in the CTA group than in the functional-testing group (10.0 mSv vs. 11.3 mSv), but 32.6% of the patients in the functional-testing group had no exposure, so the overall exposure was higher in the CTA group (mean, 12.0 mSv vs. 10.1 mSv; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In symptomatic patients with suspected CAD who required noninvasive testing, a strategy of initial CTA, as compared with functional testing, did not improve clinical outcomes over a median follow-up of 2 years. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; PROMISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01174550.).

Effect of high-dose oral multivitamins and minerals in participants not treated with statins in the randomized Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy (TACT).

IMPORTANCE: In a prespecified subgroup analysis of participants not on statin therapy at baseline in the TACT, a high-dose complex oral multivitamins and multimineral regimen was found to have a large unexpected benefit compared with placebo. The regimen tested was substantially different from any vitamin regimen tested in prior clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: To explore these results, we performed detailed additional analyses of participants not on statins at enrollment in TACT. DESIGN: TACT was a factorial trial testing chelation treatments and a 28-component high-dose oral multivitamins and multiminerals regimen versus placebo in post-myocardial infarction (MI) patients 50 years or older. PARTICIPANTS: There were 460 (27%) of 1,708 TACT participants not taking statins at baseline, 224 (49%) were in the active vitamin group and 236 (51%) were in the placebo group. SETTING: Patients were enrolled at 134 sites around the United States and Canada. INTERVENTION: Daily high-dose oral multivitamins and multiminerals (6 tablets, active or placebo). MAIN OUTCOME: The primary end point of TACT was time to the first occurrence of any component of the composite end point: all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for angina. RESULTS: The primary end point occurred in 137 nonstatin participants (30%), of which 51 (23%) of 224 were in the active group and 86 (36%) of 236 were taking placebo (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.87; P=.006). Results in the key TACT secondary end point, a combination of cardiovascular mortality, stroke, or recurrent MI, was consistent in favoring the active vitamin group (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.75; P=.002). Multiple end point analyses were consistent with these results. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: High-dose oral multivitamin and multimineral supplementation seem to decrease combined cardiac events in a stable, post-MI population not taking statin therapy at baseline. These unexpected findings are being retested in the ongoing TACT2.

Catheter Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation (CABANA) Trial: Study Rationale and Design.

The Catheter Ablation Versus Anti-arrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation (CABANA,NCT00911508)(1) trial is testing the hypothesis that the treatment strategy of percutaneous left atrial catheter ablation for the purpose of eliminating atrial fibrillation (AF) is superior to current state-of-the-art pharmacologic therapy. This international 140-center clinical trial was designed to randomize 2200 patients to a strategy of catheter ablation versus state-of-the-art rate or rhythm control drug therapy. Inclusion criteria include: 1) age> 65, or ≤65 with≥ 1 risk factor for stroke, 2) documented AF warranting treatment, and 3) eligibility for both catheter ablation and≥ 2 anti-arrhythmic or≥ 2 rate control drugs. Patients were followed every 3 to 6 months (median 4 years) and underwent repeat trans-telephonic monitoring, Holter monitoring, and CT/MR in a subgroup of patient studies to assess the impact of treatment on AF recurrence and atrial structure. With 1100 patients in each treatment arm, CABANA is projected to have 90% power for detecting a 30% relative reduction in the primary composite endpoint of total mortality, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Secondary endpoints include total mortality; mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization; a combination of mortality, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure or acute coronary artery events; cardiovascular death alone; and heart failure death, as well as AF recurrence, quality of life, and cost effectiveness. At a time when AF incidence is rising rapidly, CABANA will provide critical evidence with which to guide therapy and shape health care policy related to AF for years to come.

Impact of Intubation Time on Survival following Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Insights from the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The authors aimed to assess determinants of intubation time and evaluate its impact on 30-day and 1-year postoperative survival in Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial patients. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used among the 1,446 surgical patients from the STICH trial who survived 36 hours after operation, in order to identify perioperative factors associated with 30-day and 1-year postoperative mortality. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to determine risk factors associated with intubation time. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: At 36 hours post-operation, 1,298 (out of 1,446) were extubated and 148 (10.2%) still intubated. Median postoperative intubation time was 11.4 hours. Among patients surviving 36 hours, a multivariable model was developed to predict 30-day (c-index = 0.88) and 1-year (c-index = 0.78) mortality. Intubation time was the strongest independent predictor of 30-day (hazard ratio [HR] 5.50) and 1-year mortality (HR 3.69). Predictors of intubation time >36 hours included mitral valve procedure, New York Heart Association class, left ventricular systolic volume index, creatinine, previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and age. Results were similar in patients surviving 24 hours post-operation, where intubation time was also the strongest predictor of 30-day (HR 4.18, c-index 0.87) and 1-year (HR 2.81, c-index 0.78) mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Intubation time is the strongest predictor of 30-day and 1-year mortality among patients with ischemic heart failure undergoing CABG. Combining intubation time with other mortality risk factors may allow the identification of patients at the highest risk for whom the development of specific strategies may improve outcomes.