Abstract
Background Race/ethnic disparities in catheter ablation utilization for atrial fibrillation (AF) have been reported in the literature, however the data have not been systematically reviewed.
Objectives To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting on disparities in the utilization of catheter ablation (CA) and to explore possible root causes of disparities using a behavioral model of health service utilization.
Methods We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science and Embase for studies reporting on race/ethnic disparities in the utilization of CA for AF in the United States. A meta-analysis was performed on a subset of included articles using a random-effects model. Publication bias was assessed for race/ethnic groups pooled from 10 or more studies. We adapted a behavioral model of health service utilization to identify root causes of disparities.
Results Our search identified 20 studies published between 2011 and 2023, representing 47,700,642 patients with AF of whom over 561,490 underwent CA. Compared to non-Hispanic White patients, racial minorities had a lower odds of utilization of catheter ablation: 0.68 (95%CI 0.58 – 0.77) for non-Hispanic black (NHB) patients, 0.72 (95%CI 0.65 – 0.79) for Hispanic/LatinX (HLx) patients, and 0.62 (95%CI 0.45 – 0.78) for Asian patients. Other race groups were excluded due to insufficient data. There was a moderate to high degree of between-study heterogeneity for each race/ethnicity group: HLx (I2 = 58.2%), Asian (I2 = 80.9%), and NHB (I2 = 90.4%). Only NHB patients had sufficient data to generate a funnel plot which showed evidence of publication bias.
Conclusions The high between-study heterogeneity reveals varying degrees of disparities across studies and settings. Further research adjusting for patient-provider preferences and factors, echocardiographic data and social determinants of health is needed to clarify root causes of disparities and to promote equitable adoption of this important therapy in AF care.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding supported this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
No IRB approval was required for this work. Data is derived from published articles.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Disclosures: The authors have nothing to disclose.
Funding: None.
Data Availability
Supplement material will be provided with submission.