No abstract

No abstract

Objectives This meta-analysis and systematic review seeks to compare both characteristic parameters and procedural outcomes of catheter ablation in patients under GA/deep sedation and mild/moderate sedation. Background Catheter ablation has become a widely applied intervention for treating symptomatic AF and arrhythmias that are refractory to medical therapy. It can be conducted through from mild sedation to general anesthesia. Methods PubMed and Embase were searched up to July 2018 for randomized controlled trials, cohort and observational studies that assessed the outcomes of catheter ablation under GA/deep sedation or mild/moderate sedation. 12 studies were included in this meta-analysis after screening with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Heterogeneity between studies and publication bias was evaluated by I2 index and Egger's regression, respectively. Results Our meta-analysis found catheter AF ablation with GA/deep sedation to be associated with reduced risk of recurrence (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.56 to 1.13, P=0.20) and complications (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.42, P=0.82), though statistically insignificant. In terms of procedural parameters, there was non-significant difference between the two groups when both procedural time (SMD: −0.13, 95% CI: −0.90 to 0.63, P=0.74) and fluoroscopy time (SMD: −0.41, 95% CI: −1.40 to 0.58, P=0.41) were considered. Multivariate meta-regression demonstrated hypertension as an independent moderating factor for complication risk. Complications Comparison Conclusion Apart from an increased likelihood of procedural success, ablation by GA/deep sedation was found to be non-significantly different from the mild/moderate sedation approach in both procedural parameters and outcome measures.