Adrenergic atrial fibrillation

I've had very infrequent and brief episodes of afib. Each time I see the electrophysiologist, we've discussed ablation and the Watchman. Each time I made it clear to him that I wasn't ready to consider such invasive interventions. Recently I decided it was time to see a "regular" cardiologist, as well - someone who would look at the bigger picture. When he and I discussed my afib history, and the idea of ablation, etc., his way of putting it was, "your atrial fib burden is too low to think about those things yet." So I find the phrase "afib burden" to be a useful way to thinking and talking about how it is affecting one's life.

@shar28092 The two great determinants of a heart's future in arrhythmia are how symptomatic the bearer is and how much progression and remodelling is showing up on subsequent scans. A low burden is often well-tolerated by the hosts and by the heart, and if it's no bother to speak of, then really.........do nothing. Live with it. On the other hand, if the patient is unduly oppressed by the various symptoms, and particularly if the progression shows marked deterioration in heart function or obvious cardiomyopathy, then more drastic treatments should be done in short order. An arrhythmia patient should remember that the best time to take action is when the diagnosis is the freshest, not years later when treatments might not work very well...or at all. For atrial fibrillation (AF), it almost always progresses and it becomes more and more intractable and more deleterious to the myocardium and possibly to valves, often resulting in heart failure. For AF...get it under control as soon as possible.