Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28875448›Full record

ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2017

Clinical outcomes of AF patients treated with the first and second-generation of circular mapping and ablation catheter: insights from a real world multicenter experience.

Giovanni Rovaris, Paolo De Filippo, Francesco Laurenzi, Gabriele Zanotto, Nicola Bottoni, Mattia Pozzi, Fabrizio Giofrè, Piergiuseppe De Girolamo, Emanuela Visentin, Elena Piazzi and 1 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pulmonary vein isolation using second-generation single-shot devices: not all the same?Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2021
    Trial
  2. Acute success and safety of the second-generation PVAC GOLD phased RF ablation catheter for atrial fibrillation.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2021
    Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Giovanni RovarisOspedale San Gerardo, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale, Monza, Italy. gi.rovaris@libero.it.
Paolo De FilippoOspedale Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy.
Francesco LaurenziOspedale S. Camillo Forlanini, Rome, Italy.
Gabriele ZanottoOspedale Mater Salutis, Legnago, Italy.
Nicola BottoniArcispedale Santa Maria dei Battuti, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Mattia PozziOspedale San Gerardo, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale, Monza, Italy.
Fabrizio GiofrèOspedale Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy.
Piergiuseppe De GirolamoOspedale S. Camillo Forlanini, Rome, Italy.
Emanuela VisentinOspedale Mater Salutis, Legnago, Italy.
Elena PiazziOspedale San Gerardo, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale, Monza, Italy.
Paola FerrariOspedale Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy.
Ospedale Papa Giovanni XXIII · ITAzienda Ospedaliera San Camillo-Forlanini · ITAzienda Ospedaliera San Gerardo · ITAzienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Lariana · IT

Funding

Medtronic (US) This research was performed within the framework of the Italian ClinicalService, a project funded by Medtronic Italia, an affiliate of Medtronic Inc. No other funding sources were involved in the research.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeComplete pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the best documented target for catheter ablation, and different technologies have shown comparable outcomes. The multielectrode phased-RF/duty cycled (PhRF/DC) pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) and its second generation (PVAC-GOLD) have shown promising clinical results in single and multicenter experiences. Our aim is to assess and compare the safety and efficacy in the real clinical practice among two generations of circular PhRF/DC catheters by performing PVI in patients suffering from recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF).

methodsEighty-four AF patients treated with PVAC and 64 with PVAC-GOLD were prospectively followed in five Italian cardiology centers in the mainframe of the 1STOP-ClinicalService project.

resultsFluoroscopic and total procedure time were significantly different in the two groups. In particular, in the PVAC-GOLD group, the mean fluoroscopic time was 22.8 ± 12.7 min vs 31.6 ± 18.9 in the PVAC group (p = 0.002), and the mean total procedure duration was 117.6 ± 36.0 vs 147.4 ± 40.6, in the PVAC-GOLD group and the PVAC group, respectively (p = 0.001). Only two out of 148 patients reported a peri-procedural complication. Over 20.9 ± 12.0 months of follow-up, AF recurrence occurred in 58 patients. Kaplan-Meier freedom from AF recurrence did not differ between the two groups (64.1 ± 10% in the PVAC group vs 68.2 ± 9% in the PVAC-GOLD group at 1 year, p = ns).

conclusionsIn our multicenter analysis, AF ablation using two generations of circular PhRF/DC catheters is safe and effective. No difference was observed in terms of safety and efficacy of the AF ablation between the two catheters, with the mean procedural time being shorter in the PVAC-GOLD group.

Indexed as

AgedAtrial FibrillationBody Surface Potential MappingCardiac CathetersCatheter AblationCohort StudiesEquipment DesignEquipment SafetyFemaleFluoroscopyFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePulmonary VeinsAblation of atrial fibrillationAtrial fibrillationPulmonary vein isolationPVAC-GOLD

Identifiers

PMID28875448
OpenAlexW2753542858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.