ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2016
Clinical experience with contact-force and flexible-tip ablation catheter designs.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of open-irrigated radiofrequency catheter with contact force measurement on the efficacy and safety of atrial fibrillation ablation: a single-center direct comparison.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2022Article
- Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Catheter Ablation Outcome Depends on Pulmonary Veins Anatomy.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2018Article
- Adjunctive interpulmonary isthmus ablation has no added effects on atrial fibrillation recurrence.Open heartArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLesion formation is a critical determinant of technical and clinical success of pulmonary vein isolation. Different catheter designs aim to enhance tissue contact during ablation to enable optimized lesion formation. We analyzed procedural characteristics and predictors of clinical success in patients ablated with three different contemporary ablation catheters.
methodsTwo hundred sixty-eight sequentially included patients receiving pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with conventional (n = 122), contact-force (n = 96) and flexible-tip (n = 60) catheters were followed for a median of 14.1 months with 7d-Holter-monitoring and TTE at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Baseline characteristics and follow-up times were homogeneous across all groups.
resultsMultivariable Cox proportional hazard regression for arrhythmia recurrence demonstrated a favorable hazard ratio for contact-force and flexible-tip catheters vs. conventional open irrigation catheters. Procedure time and fluoroscopy time were shorter for contact-force and flexible-tip catheters versus conventional catheters, but equal between. Linear lesions were applied in 58 % of contact-force and 66 % of flexible-tip cases, and CFAEs were targeted in 26 % of either.
conclusionsOur non-randomized prospectively collected data do not show a difference in observed procedure characteristics and in clinical outcome for flexible-tip versus contact-force catheter designs, while both display improved performance against conventional open irrigated-tip catheters. Linear lesions and CFAEs ablation were not associated with improved arrhythmia-free survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27033358What 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.