Oral anticoagulation is frequently discontinued after ablation of paroxysmal XXXX despite @entity64 : data from the German Ablation Registry.

@entity1 @entity64 @entity1031 @entity955 @entity5567 @entity943 @entity385
AIMS: @entity955 ( @entity955 ) is the most common cause of @entity385 . Recent data suggest that @entity955 @entity1 after successful ablation have the same risk for @entity1031 events (TE) as @entity1 without @entity955 . Despite current guideline recommendations it is still under debate if oral anticoagulation (OAC) can be safely discontinued after ablation. We analyzed follow-up (FU) after ablation of paroxysmal @entity955 (PAF) in a high- ( @entity64 ; group 1) and a low-risk group (no @entity64 ; group 2) based on data from the German Ablation Registry to reveal real-life prescription behavior. METHODS: Overall 29 centers in Germany participated by performing @entity955 . Between April 2008 and April 2011, 83 @entity1 in group 1 and 377 @entity1 in group 2 with a first ablation of PAF were included in the registry. RESULTS: Mean CHA2DS2-VASc-Score was 4.2      1.4 (group 1) vs. 1.6      1.2 (group 2) (p  <  0.0001). No peri-interventional TE was observed. @entity943 recurrence was seen in 47.4 vs. 48.4  % (p  =  0.79) during a median FU of 489 (453-782) days, resulting in a repeat procedure in 20.0 vs. 20.7  % (p  =  0.88), respectively. OAC was discontinued in 38.6  % in group 1 vs. 66.3  % in group 2 (p  <  0.0001) during FU. TE during FU occurred more often in group 1 than in group 2 (4.3 vs. 0.3  %, p  <  0.05). CONCLUSION: Even in @entity1 with @entity64 , OAC was frequently discontinued during FU after @entity5567 ablation in this observational study. However, TE occurred significantly more frequent in these high-risk @entity1 . These data argue against OAC discontinuation after ablation in @entity1 with @entity64 .
