ArticleJournal of cardiovascular electrophysiology2020
Repeat pulmonary vein isolation with or without FIRM-guided ablation for recurrent atrial fibrillation with pulmonary vein reconnection.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes after redo ablation for the recurrence of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025Article
- Prospective evaluation of low voltage-guided repeat ablation of atrial fibrillation.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025Article
- Single-center initial experience with a new pulsed-field ablation system: pulmonary vein isolation lesions and beyond.Future cardiology · 2024Article
- Innovations in atrial fibrillation ablation.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2023Review
- Atrial fibrillation driver identification through regional mutual information networks: a modeling perspective.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2022Article
- Dynamic electrophysiological mechanism in patients with long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Impact of pre-ablation weight loss on the success of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2021Article
- Retrospective analysis of FIRM-guided ablation in patients with recurrent atrial fibrillation: a single-center study.Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionFocal impulse and rotor modulation (FIRM) ablation can be used to target nonpulmonary vein (PV) sources of atrial fibrillation (AF). No published studies have compared freedom from atrial fibrillation (FFAF) after pulmonary vein reisolation (PVRI) plus FIRM to PVRI alone in patients with reconnected PVs undergoing repeat ablation.
methodsA 3:1 matched retrospective cohort study was performed on 21 patients with recurrent AF and PV reconnection who underwent PVRI plus FIRM-guided ablation and 63 patients with recurrent AF treated with PVRI alone at a single institution. All patients in the PVRI-alone cohort had cryoballoon PVRI at the time of repeat ablation without additional lesion sets for AF. Cases were matched based on the type of AF (paroxysmal vs nonparoxysmal), left atrial diameter (±4 mm), left ventricular ejection fraction (±10%), duration of AF (±18 months), and age (±5 years). The primary endpoint was FFAF after a 3-month blanking period.
resultsOut of 53 total FIRM cases performed at Northwestern Memorial Hospital between 2015 and 2017, 21 patients had PVRI plus FIRM for recurrent AF with PV reconnection. These patients had an average of 3.3 ± 2.1 rotors (60% left atrial) ablated. Over a median follow-up time of 24.7 months (interquartile range, 13-36 months), patients in the PVRI-alone cohort demonstrated a higher rate of FFAF (n = 35; 55.6%) than patients in the PVRI plus FIRM-guided ablation cohort (n = 7; 33.3%) (logrank P = .049).
conclusionIn patients undergoing repeat ablation for AF with PV reconnection, PVRI plus FIRM did not increase FFAF compared to PVRI alone.
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.