Use Of Anti Arrhythmic Drugs Versus Ablation In Atrial Fibrillation (AFib) Report - Clinical And Economic Outcomes
Insights on anti Arrhythmic Drugs Vs Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation (AFib) report in Association of Clinical and Economic Outcomes & benefits.

Ken-Opurum J, Srinivas SSS, Vadagam P, Faith L, Park S, Charland S, Revel A, Preblick R Axtria, Berkeley Heights, NJ, USA; Sanofi, Bridgewater, NJ, US
Atrial Fibrillation (AFib) is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality and is characterized by arrhythmia, tachycardia, and/or bradycardia, and symptoms often include heart palpitations, shortness of breath, and weakness.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the economic benefits of anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs) in comparison to ablation, both as individual treatments and as combination therapy with/ without considering the order of treatment. A Rhythm Control Economic model was used to compare different treatment scenarios assess the economic benefits of AADs (dronedarone, amiodarone, sotalol, flecainide, propafenone, dofetilide, and AADs as a group) vs ablation. The results of the study bring forward interesting insights in comparison of direct and combination therapies.
Contact us at insights@axtria.com with any questions.
Complete the brief form to download the white paper
Recommended insights

Report
Risk Of Venous Thromboembolism And Major Bleeding In Patients With Acute Medical Illness Receiving Thromboprophylaxis With Enoxaparin

White Paper