D. Restoration of sinus rhythm for monophasic vs. biphasic waveforms .
Another study showed that PVI result ed in long-term restoration
Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is a major public health problem in the United States .
More than 2.3 million Americans are estimated to have AF ( 1 ) .
The known association between AF and substantial mortality , morbidity , and health care costs compounds the effect of this condition .
Not only is the risk for death in patients with AF twice that of patients without it , but AF can result in myocardial ischemia and infa rct ion , exacerbate heart failure ( HF ) , and cause tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy if the ventricular rate is not well-controlled ( 25 ) .
The most dreaded complication of AF is thromboembolism , especially stroke ( 6 ) .
In some patients , AF or therapies to manage this condition can severely depreciate quality of life ( 710 ) .
Furthermore , the management of AF and its complications is responsible for nearly $ 16 billion in additional costs to the U.S. health care system per year ( 11 ) .
We conducted this systematic review to evaluate the comparative safety and effectiveness of rate- versus rhythm-control strategies ;  medications used for ventricular rate control ; strict versus more lenient rate-control strategies ; nonpharmacologic rate-control therapies  versus medications ; electrical cardioversion and antiarrhythmic medications  for restoration of sinus rhythm ;  and  catheter ablation , surgical ablation , and antiarrhythmic medications  for maintenance of sinus rhythm .
Randomized comparison of encircling and nonencircling left atrial ablation for chronic atrial fibrillation.
BACKGROUND Left atrial ( LA ) circumferential ablation has been reported to eliminate atrial fibrillation ( AF ) . Whether an ablation without encirclement of the pulmonary veins ( PVs ) is as effective as LA circumferential ablation is not clear . OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of LA circumferential ablation and nonencircling linear ablation in patients with chronic AF . METHODS Eighty patients with chronic AF were r and omized to undergo LA circumferential ablation ( n = 40 ) or nonencircling linear ablation ( n = 40 ) . In LA circumferential ablation , the PVs were encircled , with additional lines made in the mitral isthmus and posterior wall or roof . In nonencircling linear ablation , 4 + /- 1 ablation lines were created through areas of complex electrograms , with lines in the roof ( 38 ) , anterior wall ( 36 ) , septum ( 40 ) , mitral isthmus ( 32 ) , and posterior annulus ( 6 ) . The endpoint of LA circumferential ablation and nonencircling linear ablation was voltage abatement . RESULTS LA flutter occurred in 15 % after LA circumferential ablation and in 18 % after nonencircling linear ablation ( P = .8 ) . A repeat ablation procedure was performed for recurrent AF in 7 and 11 patients or for atrial flutter in 6 and 4 patients after LA circumferential ablation and nonencircling linear ablation , respectively ( P = .8 ) . At 9 + /- 4 months , the prevalence of AF was 28 % in the LA circumferential ablation and 25 % in the nonencircling linear ablation group ( P = .8 ) . Sixty-eight percent and 60 % of patients were in sinus rhythm and free of AF and atrial flutter in the absence of antiarrhythmic drug therapy after LA circumferential ablation and nonencircling linear ablation , respectively ( P = .5 ) . There were no complications . CONCLUSION Nonencircling linear ablation and LA circumferential ablation are equally efficacious in eliminating chronic AF . However , the advantage of nonencircling linear ablation is that it eliminates the need for ablation along the posterior wall of the LA . Therefore , nonencircling linear ablation may avoid the small but real risk of atrioesophageal fistula formation associated with LA circumferential ablation
D. Restoration of sinus rhythm for monophasic vs. biphasic waveforms .
Another study showed that PVI result ed in long-term restoration
Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is a major public health problem in the United States .
More than 2.3 million Americans are estimated to have AF ( 1 ) .
The known association between AF and substantial mortality , morbidity , and health care costs compounds the effect of this condition .
Not only is the risk for death in patients with AF twice that of patients without it , but AF can result in myocardial ischemia and infa rct ion , exacerbate heart failure ( HF ) , and cause tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy if the ventricular rate is not well-controlled ( 25 ) .
The most dreaded complication of AF is thromboembolism , especially stroke ( 6 ) .
In some patients , AF or therapies to manage this condition can severely depreciate quality of life ( 710 ) .
Furthermore , the management of AF and its complications is responsible for nearly $ 16 billion in additional costs to the U.S. health care system per year ( 11 ) .
We conducted this systematic review to evaluate the comparative safety and effectiveness of rate- versus rhythm-control strategies ;  medications used for ventricular rate control ; strict versus more lenient rate-control strategies ; nonpharmacologic rate-control therapies  versus medications ; electrical cardioversion and antiarrhythmic medications  for restoration of sinus rhythm ;  and  catheter ablation , surgical ablation , and antiarrhythmic medications  for maintenance of sinus rhythm .