SynthesisMedicine2019
Is ablation to atrial fibrillation termination of persistent atrial fibrillation the end point?: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Atrial Fibrillation Termination Success During Ablation: Insights From Pooled Clinical Studies.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Atrial Fibrillation Termination as a Predictor for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2024Pooled it
- The prevalence and predictor factors of urinary tract infection in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients receiving SGLT2 inhibitors in Qatar: A retrospective cohort study.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Article
- Comparing the efficacy of catheter ablation strategies for persistent atrial fibrillation: a Bayesian analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2023Review
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
backgroundThe ideal ablation strategy and end point for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) have not been well founded. Defining periprocedural AF termination as the end point of catheter ablation is still controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to analyze the differences between periprocedural AF termination and non-termination in the long-term AF recurrence rate and postoperative complications.
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by a systematic search of electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library from January 2008 to August 2019. The primary outcome was freedom from AF or any atrial arrhythmia without antiarrhythmic drugs at the long-term (≥12 months) follow-up. The secondary outcome was overall postoperative complication rates. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was pooled for these outcomes. A forest plot, fixed-effects model or random-effect model, Q test, I statistic, and Egger funnel plot were used in the statistical analysis.
resultsFourteen RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, no significant difference was found in freedom from AF at the long-term follow-up between patients in whom AF termination was achieved and not achieved (RR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.78-1.09, P = .36, I = 69%). Patients with AF non-termination had a lower complication occurrence rate than those with AF termination (RR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.11-2.73, P = .02, I = 0%).
conclusionOur meta-analysis suggests that AF termination is not a reliable procedural end point during ablation of persistent AF.
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.