Submit Manuscript    >>    Login | Register

UBLED AF (Uninterrupted BLackpool EDoxaban vs Warfarin vs Rivaroxaban in Atrial Fibrillation/Flutter ablation) Study

Aim: Catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter carries a risk of thromboembolism and major bleeding. In light of recent prospective trial data on the safety and efficacy of uninterrupted edoxaban in patients undergoing AF/flutter ablation, real-world data was aimed to compared. Methods: A total of 228 patients who underwent AF/atrial flutter ablation over 14 months at our centre were retrospectively analyzed. All patients received uninterrupted oral anticoagulation for at least 4 weeks prior to ablation and 3 months post-ablation. Both bleeding and thromboembolic events were assessed at 24 hours comparing patients on warfarin, rivaroxaban and edoxaban. Results: Mean age of patients were 68.5 +/- 8 years in the warfarin group ( N =86), 63.4 +/- 10.6 years; in the edoxaban group ( N =63) and 62.3 +/- 11.6 years in the rivaroxaban group ( N =79). CHADSVASc scores were 2.43 +/- 1.34, 1.68 +/- 1.34 and 1.64 +/- 1.38 respectively. The mean left atrial sizes were 42.7 +/- 6.8 mm, 42.0 +/- 6 mm and 41.1 +/- 6.5 mm respectively. The study endpoint was death, acute thromboembolism or major bleeding. There was 1 pericardial effusion (1.2%) in the warfarin group, 1 pericardial effusion and 1 transient ischaemic attack (2.5%) in the rivaroxaban group and 1 pericardial effusion needing drainage (1.6%) in the edoxaban group. There were no significant differences in the study endpoints between groups. Conclusion: This real-world study demonstrated no significant difference in safety and efficacy between uninterrupted edoxaban, warfarin and rivaroxaban in patients undergoing AF/flutter ablation.

Credits: Narendra Kumar; Noha Elbanhawy; Moinuddin Choudhury; Rahul Potluri; Shajil Chalil; Khalid Abozguia

Biosense Webster
event date
Introduction to AFib
Ablation Specialist

View Ablation Specialists