Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

CABANA trial: “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The CABANA trial reported that catheter ablation, when compared with drug therapy, did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest in patients with atrial fibrillation. Despite multiple limitations in study design, the CABANA trial still confirmed that catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation led to clinically important and significant improvements in quality of life at 12 months without increasing the risk of complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Packer DL, Mark DB, Robb RA, Monahan KH, Bahnson TD, Poole JE, et al. Effect of catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug therapy on mortality, stroke, bleeding, and cardiac arrest among patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA randomized clinical trial. Jama. 2019;321:1261.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Mark DB, Anstrom KJ, Sheng S, Piccini JP, Baloch KN, Monahan KH, et al. Effect of catheter ablation vs medical therapy on quality of life among patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA randomized clinical trial. Jama. 2019;321:1275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Montori VM, Permanyer-Miralda G, Ferreira-Gonzalez I, et al. Validity of composite end points in clinical trials. Bmj. 2005;330:594–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. McCoy CE. Understanding the use of composite endpoints in clinical trials. West J Emerg Med. 2018;19:631–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bang H, Davis CE. On estimating treatment effects under non-compliance in randomized clinical trials: are intent-to-treat or instrumental variables analyses perfect solutions? Stat Med. 2007;26:954–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sheiner LB, Rubin DB. Intention-to-treat analysis and the goals of clinical trials. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1995;57:6–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Little RJ, Long Q, Lin X. A comparison of methods for estimating the causal effect of a treatment in randomized clinical trials subject to noncompliance. Biometrics. 2009;65:640–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ye C, Beyene J, Browne G, Thabane L. Estimating treatment effects in randomised controlled trials with non-compliance: a simulation study. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e005362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Shrier I, Verhagen E, Stovitz SD. The intention-to-treat analysis is not always the conservative approach. Am J Med. 2017;130:867–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, Kim YH, Saad EB, Aguinaga L, et al. 2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14:e275–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Montefiore-Einstein Center for Heart and Vascular Care, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 111 East 210th St. Bronx, New York, NY, 10467, USA

    David Briceno, Luigi Di Biase & Jorge Romero

  2. Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute, St. David’s Medical Center, Austin, TX, 78705, USA

    Prasant Mohanty, Luigi Di Biase, Domenico Giovanni Della Rocca, Chintan Trivedi, Sanghamitra Mohanty & Andrea Natale

Authors
  1. David Briceno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prasant Mohanty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luigi Di Biase
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jorge Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Domenico Giovanni Della Rocca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chintan Trivedi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sanghamitra Mohanty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Andrea Natale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luigi Di Biase.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Briceno, D., Mohanty, P., Di Biase, L. et al. CABANA trial: “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 57, 1–3 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-019-00604-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-019-00604-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation