<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><xml><records><record><source-app name="HighWire" version="7.x">Drupal-HighWire</source-app><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Shuman, Jill</style></author></authors><secondary-authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mont, Lluis</style></author></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drugs in Persistent AF: The SARA Trial</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">MD Conference Express</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014-08-01 00:00:00</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pages><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">24-25</style></pages><abstract><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy (ADT), catheter ablation (CA) is an effective treatment for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) [Jaïs P et al. Circulation 2008]. Although CA is recommended as an indication for patients with PAF by current US and European guidelines [Camm A et al. Eur Heart J 2012; Fuster V et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011], its use by patients with persistent AF is unclear and even controversial. This article reviews data from the Study of Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drugs in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation [SARA; Mont L et al. Eur Heart J 2014].</style></abstract><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">21</style></number><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">14</style></volume></record></records></xml>