ReviewClinical cardiology2019
Uninterrupted anticoagulation with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: Lessons learned from randomized trials.
Review in Clinical cardiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of controlled studies on minimally interrupted vs. continuous use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in catheter ablation for 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 · 2021Pooled it
- High-power short-duration vs conventional radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients over 80 years of age: A propensity-score matched cohort analysis.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- Evaluation of an adaptive, rule-based dosing algorithm to maintain therapeutic anticoagulation during atrial fibrillation ablation.Cardiovascular digital health journal · 2023Article
- Uninterrupted use of direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation with PVAC gold: incidence of silent cerebral microembolic events.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2021Article
- Changes in plasma concentrations of edoxaban and coagulation biomarkers according to thromboembolic risk and atrial fibrillation type in patients undergoing catheter ablation: Subanalysis of KYU-RABLE.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
- Uninterrupted anticoagulation with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: Lessons learned from randomized trials.Clinical cardiology · 2019Review
- Uninterrupted Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Catheter Ablation: Ready for Prime Time.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologiaArticle
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 9 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Catheter ablation has been established as a rhythm control strategy in selected patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who have failed or wish to avoid anti-arrhythmic drugs. Uninterrupted oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) peri-ablation is associated with a lower risk of thromboembolic and bleeding complications as compared to interrupted oral anticoagulation and bridging heparin. However, a substantial portion of patients with AF are treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Herein, we perform an in-depth review and comparison of three recent randomized trials of uninterrupted oral anticoagulation with NOACs vs VKAs in patients undergoing AF catheter ablation. Furthermore, we report pooled results of these randomized trials. The pooled incidence of major bleeding was significantly lower with NOACs as compared to VKAs (2% vs 4.9%, respectively; odds ratio [OR] 0.40; 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.16-0.99). Similarly, cardiac tamponade was also reduced in the NOAC group (0.4% vs 1.5%; OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.07-0.97). Thromboembolic complications were not significantly different between groups. Overall, these findings support the 2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement's class I recommendation for uninterrupted NOAC use in patients undergoing AF catheter ablation.
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.