PRODUÇÃO ACADÊMICA Repositório Acadêmico da Graduação (RAG) TCC Medicina
Use este identificador para citar ou linkar para este item: https://repositorio.pucgoias.edu.br/jspui/handle/123456789/8849
Registro completo de metadados
Campo DCValorIdioma
dc.creatorDaher, Rafael Ferreirapt_BR
dc.date.accessioned2025-04-01T20:29:59Z-
dc.date.available2025-04-01T20:29:59Z-
dc.date.issued2024-10-27-
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.pucgoias.edu.br/jspui/handle/123456789/8849-
dc.description.sponsorshipNão recebi financiamentopt_BR
dc.languageengpt_BR
dc.publisherPontifícia Universidade Católica de Goiáspt_BR
dc.rightsAcesso Abertopt_BR
dc.subjectCryoballoon ablation; Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation; Persistent atrial fibrillation; Pulmonary vein isolation; Pulsed-field ablation; Radiofrequency ablation; Thermal ablationpt_BR
dc.titlePulsed-field ablation versus thermal ablation for atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysispt_BR
dc.typeTrabalho de Conclusão de Cursopt_BR
dc.contributor.advisor1Menezes Junior, Antônio da Silvapt_BR
dc.contributor.advisor1Latteshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/4141970817482471pt_BR
dc.contributor.referee1Silva, Antonio Márcio Teodoro Cordeiropt_BR
dc.contributor.referee1Latteshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/8550177354539916pt_BR
dc.description.resumoBACKGROUND Pulsed-fieldablation(PFA)isanalternative tothermal ablation (TA) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) receiving catheter-based therapy for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). However, its efficacy and safety have yet to be fully elucidated. OBJECTIVE Thepurposeofthisstudywastocomparetheacuteand long-term efficacies and safety of PFA and TA. METHODS We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials comparing PFA and TA in patients with AF undergoing their first PVI ablation. The TA group was divided into cryoballoon (CB) and radiofrequency subgroups. AF patients were divided into paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) and persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF) subgroups for further analysis. RESULTS Eighteen studies involving 4998 patients (35.2% PFA) were included. Overall, PFA was associated with a shorter procedure time (mean difference [MD]–21.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]–32.81 to–10.54) but longer fluoroscopy time (MD 4.53; 95% CI 2.18–6.88) than TA. Regarding safety, lower (peri-)esophageal injury rates (odds ratio [OR] 0.17; 95% CI 0.06–0.46) and higher tamponade rates (OR 2.98; 95% CI 1.27–7.00) were observed after PFA. In efficacy assessment, PFA was associated with a better firstpass isolation rate (OR 6.82; 95% CI 1.37–34.01) and a lower treatment failure rate (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.70–0.98). Subgroup analysis showed no differences in PersAF and PAF. CB was related to higher (peri)esophageal injury, and lower PVI acute success and procedural time. CONCLUSION Compared to TA, PFA showed better results with regard to acute and long-term efficacy but significant differences in safety, with lower (peri)esophageal injury rates but higher tamponade rates in procedural data.pt_BR
dc.publisher.countryBrasilpt_BR
dc.publisher.departmentEscola de Ciências Médicas e da Vidapt_BR
dc.publisher.initialsPUC Goiáspt_BR
dc.subject.cnpqCNPQ::CIENCIAS DA SAUDEpt_BR
dc.subject.cnpqCNPQ::CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::MEDICINA::CLINICA MEDICA::CARDIOLOGIApt_BR
dc.degree.graduationMedicinapt_BR
dc.degree.levelGraduaçãopt_BR
Aparece nas coleções:TCC Medicina

Arquivos associados a este item:
Arquivo TamanhoFormato 
PIIS2666501824001077 (2).pdf3,06 MBAdobe PDFVisualizar/Abrir
Mostrar registro simples do item Visualizar estatísticas


Os itens no repositório estão protegidos por copyright, com todos os direitos reservados, salvo quando é indicado o contrário.

Ferramentas do administrador