ArticleCardiology research and practice2018
The Impact of Left Atrial Size in Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation Using Remote Magnetic Navigation.
Article in Cardiology research and practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to investigate the impact of left atrial (LA) size for the ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) using remote magnetic navigation (RMN).
methodsA total of 165 patients with AF who underwent catheter ablation using RMN were included. The patients were divided into two groups based on LA diameter. Eighty-three patients had small LA (diameter <40 mm; Group A), and 82 patients had a large LA (diameter ≥40 mm; Group B).
resultsDuring mapping and ablation, X-ray time (37.0 (99.0) s vs. 12 (30.1) s,
conclusionsAF ablation using RMN is safe and effective in both small and large LA patients. Patients with small LA may pose a greater difficulty when using RMN which may be attributed to the fewer magnets beyond the sheath. As a result, the exposure of radiation was increased. This study found that having at least two magnets of the catheter positioned outside of the sheath can ensure an appropriate flexibility of the catheter.
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.