ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2018
Comparison of the efficacy between impedance-guided and contact force-guided atrial fibrillation ablation using an automated annotation system.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Representation of Women in Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Randomized Controlled Trials: Systematic Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Pooled it
- 2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation.Journal of arrhythmia · 2024Article
- 2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2024Article
- 2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation.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 · 2024Article
- Rationale and study design for ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation guided by ablation index: a multi-center, prospective randomized trial (PAF-AI trial).Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2021Article
- Comparison of the efficacy between impedance-guided and contact force-guided atrial fibrillation ablation using an automated annotation system.Journal of arrhythmia · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study compared the efficacy of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) between impedance (IMP)-guided and contact force (CF)-guided annotation using the automated annotation system (VisiTag™).
methodsFifty patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for AF were randomized to the IMP-guided or CF-guided groups. The annotation criteria for VisiTag™ were a 10 second minimum ablation time and 2 mm maximum catheter movement range. A minimum CF of 10 g was added to the criteria in the CF-guided group. In the IMP-guided group, a minimum IMP drop of over 5 Ω was added to the criteria.
resultsThe rates of successful PVI after an initial ablation line were higher in the CF-guided group (80% vs 48%,
conclusionsAtrial fibrillation ablation using an automated annotation system guided by CF improved the success rate of PVI after the initial circumferential ablation. An IMP-guided annotation combined with catheter stability criteria showed similar clinical outcomes as compared to the CF-guided annotation.
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.