ReviewHerzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie2019
Atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: an updated review of current guidelines and expert consensus documents.
Review in Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Left Atrial Appendage Volume Predicts Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence after Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation: A Meta-Analysis.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2023Pooled it
- Association of quantitative computed tomography-based right atrial appendage and right atrium parameters with postradiofrequency ablation recurrence of atrial fibrillation.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Gene Polymorphism and Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation after Catheter Ablation: A Comprehensive Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Acupuncture Anesthesia for Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation in Treatment of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: A Case Report.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia, its management remains complex and depends on several variables. Over the past decade, catheter ablation has been widely used as an effective method for rhythm control in AF patients. Therefore, AF ablation has been the focus of many studies in recent years. Given the complexity of AF management and catheter ablation, several guidelines have been developed to regulate and direct management of AF patients. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC), together with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and the European Association of Cardiothoracic Surgeons (EACTS), has been regulating the European guidelines, while the American Heart Association (AHA), along with the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), is publishing the US guidelines. Additionally, HRS, EHRA, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons, along with representatives from heart rhythm societies from different parts of the world, have developed an "expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of AF." This article reviews and compares the most recent guidelines and consensus document on 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.