I'm new to this site and it seems most people here are well informed. I'm 68 now, first diagnosed with afib 2 years ago and now it's fairly persistent. I rarely have symptoms and I'm in pretty good spirits. Ablations are being recommended but we all know there are risks involved. Does anyone here know of someone who regretted having ablations with asymptomatic persistent afib?
Thanks.
If you are asymptomatic there seems little point on the face of it. All treatment is only for quaility of life (QOL) so I can't see how your QOL will be improved .
Provided that you are anticoagulated where appropriate and your rate is well controlled there is no risk to life.
I've had three ablations and still have AF. If you're asymptomatic I wouldn't choose to have one.
The fact that you asymptomatic doesn’t remove the risks associated with AFIB. There could be a chance you would come off most of the medication after a successful ablation. Also you don’t know how the Afib is going to progress over time.
Neither does ablation kalgs. See my answer above please.
My point was that coming off the drugs has got to be a good point because of side-effects etc. There are many people that come off anticoagulants after a successful ablation. I guess it’s the point of if an individual would like to remove or reduce their dependency on drugs. It was certainly a major consideration for me. All drugs have side-effects.As always we should be guided by medical advice. All forums are based on opinion and experience.
Welcome to the Forum! If you would like any supportive advice or information, please visit our A F Association website for details on patient resources and our 'Virtual' HRC2021 A F Association Patients Day - launching online Sunday 3 October - follow the link for further details : heartrhythmcongress.org/pro...
I’m in the same club as jeanjeannie. Had 3 and still get a episode of AFIB every few months. But if it’s not affecting your QOL then I probably wouldn’t bother.👍
Welcome to the group! Your question is a recurring one. If your QOL is good, your rate controlled and you are using an anti-coagulant is invasive ablation indicated? I'm 68, and in consultation with my cardiologist, we decided against it. But you'll live with a risk of a bleed as a tradeoff for lowered stroke risk, in addition to that irregular pulse. Those elements can present a psychological burden for some. I was able to fully rest in the decision my doctor and I arrived at, I've put that aspect of my AF behind me. I think the ability to that is an oft overlooked aspect of living with whichever choice one makes, and a necessary one in maintaining good QOL. Best of luck as you move forward!
Hi. I am also 68 and and my last echo showed a slightly dilated left atrium. My QOL is good and my ventricular rate is 70-80 but I'm in afib/aflutter with atrial rate in 200s, probably most of the time. I guess that's normal for afib or with persistent afib. I'm concerned about the future risk of heart failure and have read that ablation is also recommended to reduce the future risk of heart failure as well as stroke and dimentia. But I'm also afraid of procedural complications. Can I ask why you decided against ablations?
I decided against ablation because the risk/reward wasn't what I need to be comfortable with the procedure given my high QOL. By contrast, I am fully vaccinated. The risk/reward is one I'm very comfortable with when it comes to those.
The question my EP put to me was if AF is not affecting your QOL and the condition is well controlled do you really want somebody burning the inside of your heart because that is essentially what he has to do.
Thanks. I have read ablations may also help reduce the risk of future heart failure and dimentia. I'm not sure if that's only if they're successful. Is that brought up much in this forum?
Asymptomatic AFIB
Post-Ablation Afib Episode Causes?
Persistent afib 
SVT or Afib Ablation Recovery 
Afib Ablation time is near!
