Trial reportANZ journal of surgery2020
Five-year results of a modified left atrial maze IV procedure in the treatment of atrial fibrillation: a randomized study.
Trial report in ANZ journal of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The association between hematological inflammatory markers and atrial fibrillation recurrence after radiofrequency ablation.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Interaction between neutrophil extracellular traps and cardiomyocytes contributes to atrial fibrillation progression.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe left atrial maze IV (LAM-IV) alone has been used to eliminate atrial fibrillation (AF) without severe right heart diseases. However, we felt that it could be improved and developed a modified LAM-IV (MLAM-IV). In this prospective trial, we aimed to investigate 5-year clinical outcomes of AF in patients treated by the novel MLAM-IV technique.
methodsBetween September 2012 and October 2013, 120 patients who underwent valve surgery and bipolar radiofrequency ablation for AF were randomized into the LAM-IV group (n = 60) or MLAM-IV group (n = 60). At postoperative follow-up examinations, data were recorded at 1, 3 and 6 months, and annually thereafter.
resultsThe mean ablation time and postoperative ventilation time were shorter in the MLAM-IV group than in the LAM-IV group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.03, respectively). At 5 years, the rate of freedom from AF was 69.0% in the MLAM-IV group and 60.0% in the LAM-IV group (hazard ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 1.32, P = 0.42). There were no differences with respect to the early operative mortality and major complications, late mortality, and major adverse events.
conclusionsThe MLAM-IV provides a technically simpler ablation process. The MLAM-IV was associated with less ventilation support in the early postoperative period. The long-term efficacy of the MLAM-IV in the treatment of AF is comparable to that of the LAM-IV.
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.