Huang H, Wang Q, Xu J, et al. - Researchers analyzed randomized controlled trials that compared catheter ablation (CA) with surgical ablation (SA) for atrial fibrillation (AF), to determine differences between the two treatment approaches in terms of benefits and adverse effects. These studies were identified from MEDLINE and four additional databases. The absence of AF during a 12-month follow-up without the use of antiarrhythmic drugs was the primary endpoint. The inclusion criteria for efficacy outcome evaluations were satisfied by 7 trials. After the meta-analysis, a summary odds ratio of attaining success one year following CA vs SA of 0.37:1 was obtained. The finding was robust in the subgroup study. A higher incidence of femoral vascular complications, but a lower incidence of pneumothorax was reported in relation to CA vs SA. Overall, findings revealed that SA, vs CA, afforded a moderate benefit in one-year efficacy outcomes as well as may be safely done by experienced surgeons.