RECENT FINDINGS Several r and omized control trials and systematic review s demonstrate the safety and efficacy of atrial fibrillation ablation in patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction .
In multiple trials , these patients have shown clinical benefit from atrial fibrillation ablation including improved left ventricular systolic function , quality of life , and clinical heart failure symptoms .
SUMMARY Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients remains well tolerated with an overall efficacy comparable to atrial fibrillation ablation in patients without heart failure .
There is consistent evidence for the clinical benefit of atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and limited evidence for atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction .
Currently , there is insufficient data regarding the safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage closure devices in heart failure patients
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure experience an increased morbidity and mortality from the hemodynamic consequences of atrial fibrillation and an increased stroke risk .
Consequently , there has been increased attention to procedural alternatives to pharmacologic rhythm control and anticoagulation for stroke prevention .
This review aims to evaluate the evidence for atrial fibrillation ablation and left atrial appendage closure in heart failure patients .
Radiofrequency ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation in patients with advanced heart failure and severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a randomised controlled trial
Objective To determine whether or not radiofrequency ablation ( RFA ) for persistent atrial fibrillation in patients with advanced heart failure leads to improvements in cardiac function . Setting Patients were recruited from heart failure outpatient clinics in Scotl and . Design and intervention Patients with advanced heart failure and severe left ventricular dysfunction were r and omised to RFA ( rhythm control ) or  continued medical treatment  ( rate control ) . Patients were followed up for a minimum of 6 months . Main outcome measure Change in left ventricular ejection fraction ( LVEF ) measured by cardiovascular MRI . Results 22 patients were r and omised to RFA and 19 to medical treatment . In the RFA group , 50 % of patients were in sinus rhythm at the end of the study ( compared with none in the medical treatment group ) . The increase in cardiovascular magnetic resonance ( CMR ) LVEF in the RFA group was 4.5±11.1 % compared with 2.8±6.7 % in the medical treatment group ( p=0.6 ) . The RFA group had a greater increase in radionuclide LVEF ( a prespecified secondary end point ) than patients in the medical treatment group ( + 8.2±12.0 % vs + 1.4±5.9 % ; p=0.032 ) . RFA did not improve N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide , 6 min walk distance or quality of life . The rate of serious complications related to RFA was 15 % . Conclusions RFA result ed in long-term restoration of sinus rhythm in only 50 % of patients . RFA did not improve CMR LVEF compared with a strategy of rate control . RFA did improve radionuclide LVEF but did not improve other secondary outcomes and was associated with a significant rate of serious complications . Clinical trials registration number NCT00292162
RECENT FINDINGS Several r and omized control trials and systematic review s demonstrate the safety and efficacy of atrial fibrillation ablation in patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction .
In multiple trials , these patients have shown clinical benefit from atrial fibrillation ablation including improved left ventricular systolic function , quality of life , and clinical heart failure symptoms .
SUMMARY Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients remains well tolerated with an overall efficacy comparable to atrial fibrillation ablation in patients without heart failure .
There is consistent evidence for the clinical benefit of atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and limited evidence for atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction .
Currently , there is insufficient data regarding the safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage closure devices in heart failure patients
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure experience an increased morbidity and mortality from the hemodynamic consequences of atrial fibrillation and an increased stroke risk .
Consequently , there has been increased attention to procedural alternatives to pharmacologic rhythm control and anticoagulation for stroke prevention .
This review aims to evaluate the evidence for atrial fibrillation ablation and left atrial appendage closure in heart failure patients .