ArticleMedicine2017
Extremely low-frame-rate digital fluoroscopy in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: A comparison of 2 versus 4 frame rate.
Article in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of radiation exposure between endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage and transpapillary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for pancreatobiliary diseases.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2022Article
- Effect of fluoroscopy frame rate on radiation exposure and in-hospital outcomes in three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping guided procedures.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
- Real-Time High-Resolution MRI Endoscopy at up to 10 Frames per Second.BME frontiers · 2021Article
- [Update on radiation exposure in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2020Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the technological advance in 3-dimensional (3D) mapping, radiation exposure during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) continues to be a major concern in both patients and physicians. Previous studies reported substantial radiation exposure (7369-8690 cGy cm) during AF catheter ablation with fluoroscopic settings of 7.5 frames per second (FPS) under 3D mapping system guidance. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of a low-frame-rate fluoroscopy protocol for catheter ablation for AF.Retrospective analysis of data on 133 patients who underwent AF catheter ablation with 3-D electro-anatomic mapping at our institute from January 2014 to May 2015 was performed. Since January 2014, fluoroscopy frame rate of 4-FPS was implemented at our institute, which was further decreased to 2-FPS in September 2014. We compared the radiation exposure quantified as dose area product (DAP) and effective dose (ED) between the 4-FPS (n = 57) and 2-FPS (n = 76) groups.The 4-FPS group showed higher median DAP (599.9 cGy cm; interquartile range [IR], 371.4-1337.5 cGy cm vs. 392.0 cGy cm; IR, 289.7-591.4 cGy cm; P < .01), longer median fluoroscopic time (24.4 min; IR, 17.5-34.9 min vs. 15.1 min; IR, 10.7-20.1 min; P < .01), and higher median ED (1.1 mSv; IR, 0.7-2.5 mSv vs. 0.7 mSv; IR, 0.6-1.1 mSv; P < .01) compared with the 2-FPS group. No major procedure-related complications such as cardiac tamponade were observed in either group. Over follow-up durations of 331 ± 197 days, atrial tachyarrhythmia recurred in 20 patients (35.1%) in the 4-FPS group and in 27 patients (35.5%) in the 2-FPS group (P = .96). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed no significant different between the 2 groups (log rank, P = .25).In conclusion, both the 4-FPS and 2-FPS settings were feasible and emitted a relatively low level of radiation compared with that historically reported for DAP in a conventional fluoroscopy setting.
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.