There is limited evidence to suggest which ablation method was the best .
There is limited evidence to suggest that CA may be a better treatment option compared to medical therapies in the management of persistent AF .
This review was also unable to recommend the best CA method
BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia seen in cardiovascular departments .
Treatments include medical interventions and catheter ablation .
Due to uncertainties in medical therapies for AF , and the need to continue sinus rhythm , ablation has been recently considered as a viable alternative .
Many new ablation methods based on pulmonary vein isolation ( PVI ) have been developed .
OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this review was to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of  catheter ablation ( CA ) in comparison with medical treatment in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF .
The secondary objective was to determine the best regimen of CA .
Safety and efficacy of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with diabetes mellitus—single center experience
Background and objective Little is known about the outcome of  catheter ablation of  atrial fibrillation ( AF )  in patients with diabetes mellitus ( DM ) . We investigated the safety and efficacy of catheter ablation of AF  in patients with DM . Material s and methods Thirty one patients with DM from a group of 263 consecutive patients undergoing a first-time catheter ablation of AF procedure  were enrolled in a prospect i ve study . The ablation protocol ( guided by CARTO system ) consisted in two continuous circular lesions around ipsilateral pulmonary veins . Results The following clinical characteristics differed between DM and no-DM patients : age ( 62.0 ± 10.8 vs. 56.1 ± 10.6 years , P = 0.004 ) , longer AF history ( 9.6 ± 9.3 vs. 6.7 ± 6.3 years , P = 0.024 ) , significantly larger left atrium size ( 41.1 ± 7.8 vs. 38.3 ± 5.8 mm , P = 0.021 ) , hypertension ( 58.1 vs. 35.8 % , P = 0.018 ) and structural heart disease ( 67.7 vs. 43.5 % , P = 0.011 ) . Despite a similar AF recurrence rate in DM and no-DM patients ( 32.3 vs. 22.4 % , P = 0.240 ) , the ablation procedure was complicated in 28 patients ( 11 hematomas , three cardiac tamponades and three strokes ) and the incidence of complications was significantly higher in DM than in no-DM patients ( 29.0 vs. 8.2 % , respectively , P = 0.002 ) . Multivariate analysis showed that DM was an independent risk factor for complications occurrence ( odd ratio 5.936 , 95 % confidence interval 2.059 to 17.112 , P = 0.001 ) . Conclusions First catheter ablation of AF procedure in DM patients was equally efficacious than in no-DM patients . However , DM patients had a higher incidence of complications , mostly thrombotic or hemorrhagic
There is limited evidence to suggest which ablation method was the best .
There is limited evidence to suggest that CA may be a better treatment option compared to medical therapies in the management of persistent AF .
This review was also unable to recommend the best CA method
BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia seen in cardiovascular departments .
Treatments include medical interventions and catheter ablation .
Due to uncertainties in medical therapies for AF , and the need to continue sinus rhythm , ablation has been recently considered as a viable alternative .
Many new ablation methods based on pulmonary vein isolation ( PVI ) have been developed .
OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this review was to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of  catheter ablation ( CA ) in comparison with medical treatment in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF .
The secondary objective was to determine the best regimen of CA .