IMHO, I think a-fib that is managed well by an electrophysiologist and tolerated well by the patient should equate to very few occupational restrictions. I suppose the question is what is successful management and tolerance. I had a-fib half the time, but on Betace (sotalol) and anti-coagulant, there was little I couldn't do that didn't involve a sustained heart rate over 120 bpm.

CV has mixed success rates for different types . I can testify to 100% for my 6 times over 5 years. When Magnesium is used in the IV pre CV, the success rate is increased greatly. Ill take the CV any time over ablation. The word success is subjective. Ive had CVs last anywhere from 3 to 18 months. It allowed me time to seek alternative treatments. For me to have an ablation and still be on meds is anything but success. For those who can handle meds well and go in and out of Afib, , ablation seems to be the answer.

Ablation is looked at as a more permanent solution as opposed to cardioversion. CV works well for some folks - but often doesn't last long. When combined with an antiarrhythmic the success rates are higher.

There is a new technique that's being developed called the hybrid ablation that targets both the inside of the heart and the outside. The inside of the heart is ablated by an electrophysiologist in the normal way (either by cryo or radiofrequency), and the outside of the heart is ablated by a cardiac surgeon at the same time using catheters that enter the body via a small incision in the rib cage.

The EP who did both of my ablations has already done 8 of these procedures, and while it's still bleeding-edge stuff today I think this will likely become the gold standard for curing afib long-term.

Duder, permanent could be good and bad. Irreversible for sure. One issue I take with ablation is that the underlying cause of afib or the electrical charge is not corrected. Of course when the charge gets to the scarred heart it is prevented from causing afib. However, PVCs and PACs usually are more frequent. I m still of the opinion of last line and not first line treatment. I can do a whole lot of good things for less than $100k to prevent AF.

With an SA node ablation, the cause is addressed. That's where the electrical signals originate.

I may be one of the lucky ones. I've had zero arrhythmia since my second ablation. I've experienced PACs, SVT and afib previously.

I agree that ablation should definitely not be a first-line treatment. If I had it to do over again, I would have started with supplements and nutrition. Then if that didn't work, beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, then antiarrhythmics. After those fail then you start thinking about ablation. Surgery isn't for everyone, even then.

I started with beta blockers (at the time I hadn't been diagnosed with afib, only harmless PACs). It progressed over time to SVT, and finally afib. It took years to catch all this on a heart monitor. At the time, I didn't know there were options as far as supplements and nutrition goes. As you know, doctors don't discuss that much, except to say don't drink alcohol or caffeine.

Duder, Ill have to take your word for the SA node as addressing the cause because I am a bit ignorant in my research of ablations. I do believe there could be other underlying issues so it would be impossible to know each patients successes or failures. I happen to know a few of both, completely cured and still on meds after ablation. If it matters to anyone here, I will be putting my experience with allopathic and natural treatment together soon. Believe or not, it was an allopath who discouraged my ablation and started me on a natural path to wellness. If it helps 1 person, Ill feel like I ve contributed to this cause. I will say however, its been a pretty lonely journey with most choosing the meds and ablation, to which I certainly understand and respect. Regards.