ReviewJournal of atrial fibrillation
Is An Atrial Defibrillator Still An Option In Treating Patients With Atrial Fibrillation?
Review in Journal of atrial fibrillation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common disorder associated with significant morbidities and presents several challenges for the control of symptoms and prevention of long-term implications. Atrial defibrillators (ADs), used for rhythm control in patients with symptoms refractory to medical therapy, can detect recurrences of the arrhythmia, allow prompt patient-directed treatment, and have the potential to reduce hospitalizations and improve quality of life. The efficacy of this form of therapy is highest in patients with paroxysmal AF, and with the use of a coronary sinus shocking lead. While R-wave synchronized shocks are a prerequisite for a safe use, the procedure is well tolerated and usually not associated with long-term psychological side effects. Limitations of ADs include acute and chronic complications related to cardiac rhythm device implantation, the requirement in some cases for more than one shock to terminate AF, the discomfort from shocks, as well as the need for sedation to alleviate pain from the shocks. With the ever-expanding role of catheter-based therapies for AF, it seems that the role of ADs in this regard is rather limited.
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.