ArticlePloS one2015
Risk and outcome after ablation of isthmus-dependent atrial flutter in elderly patients.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Heart failure and atrial flutter: a systematic review of current knowledge and practices.ESC heart failure · 2021Pooled it
- Management of patients with atrial tachycardia: a clinical consensus statement of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC, endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC).Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Article
- Safety and Outcomes of Catheter Ablation for Consecutive Atrial Tachycardia in Elderly Patients After Previous Cardiac Interventions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Lone Atrial Flutter in Children and Adolescents: Is It Really "Lone"?Pediatric cardiology · 2021Article
- Arrhythmias in Patients ≥80 Years of Age: Pathophysiology, Management, and Outcomes.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2018Review
- Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of the researchTo study the influence of age on the clinical presentation and long-term outcome of patients referred for atrial flutter (AFL) ablation. Age-related differences have been reported regarding the prognosis of arrhythmias.
methodsA total of 1187 patients with a mean age 65±12 years consecutively referred for AFL ablation were retrospectively analyzed in the study.
results445 (37.5%) patients were aged ≥70 (range 70 to 93) among which 345 were aged 70 to 79 years (29.1%) and 100 were aged ≥80 (8.4%). In multivariable analysis, AFL-related rhythmic cardiomyopathy and presentation with 1/1 AFL were less frequent (respectively adjusted OR = 0.44, 0.27-0.74, p = 0.002 and adjusted OR = 0.29, 0.16-0.52, p<0.0001). AFL ablation-related major complications were more frequent in patients ≥70 although remained lower than 10% (7.4% in ≥70 vs. 4.2% in <70, adjusted OR = 1.74, 1.04-2.89, p = 0.03). After 2.1±2.7 years, AFL recurrence was less frequent in patients ≥70 (adjusted OR = 0.54, 0.37-0.80, p = 0.002) whereas atrial fibrillation (AF) occurrence was as frequent in the 70-79 and ≥80 age subsets. As expected, cardiac mortality was higher in older patients. Patients aged ≥80 also had a low probability of AFL recurrence (5.0%) and AF onset (19.0%).
conclusionsOlder patients represent 37.5% of patients referred for AFL ablation and displayed a <10% risk of ablation-related complications. Importantly, AFL recurrences were less frequent in patients ≥70 while AF occurrence was as frequent as in patients <70. Similar observations were made in patients ≥80 years. AFL ablation appears to be safe and efficient and should not be ruled out in elderly patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.