ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2020
Coagulation and heparin requirements during ablation in patients under oral anticoagulant drugs.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concise Guidelines of the European Cardiac Arrhythmias Society (ECAS) on "Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation".Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2025Article
- Optimal Anticoagulant Strategy for Periprocedural Management of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Coagulation and heparin requirements during ablation in patients under oral anticoagulant drugs.Journal of arrhythmia · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnticoagulation during catheter ablation should be closely monitored with activated clotting time (ACT). However vitamin K antagonists (VKA) or direct oral anticoagulant drugs (DOAC) may act differently on ACT and on heparin needs. The aim of this study was to compare ACT and heparin requirements during catheter ablation under various oral anticoagulant drugs and in controls.
methodsSixty consecutive patients referred for ablation were retrospectively included: group I (n = 15, VKA), group 2 (n = 15, uninterrupted rivaroxaban), group 3 (n = 15, uninterrupted apixaban), and group 4 (n = 15, controls). Heparin requirements and ACT were compared throughout the procedure.
resultsHeparin requirements during the procedure were significantly lower in patients under VKA compared to DOAC, but similar between DOAC patients and controls.Activated clotting time values were significantly higher in patients under VKA compared to DOAC and similar in DOAC patients versus controls. Furthermore, anticoagulation control as evaluated by the number/proportion of ACT> 300 as well as the time passed over 300 seconds was significantly better in patients under VKA versus DOAC, without significant differences between DOAC and controls. Finally, the number of patients/ACT with excessive ACT values was significantly higher in VKA versus DOAC patients versus controls.There was no significant difference between rivaroxaban and apixaban for ACT or heparin dosing throughout the procedure.
conclusionVitamin K antagonists allowed less heparin requirement despite reaching higher ACT values and more efficient anticoagulation control (with more excessive values) compared to patients under DOAC therapy and to controls. There was no difference in heparin requirements or ACT between DOAC patients and controls.
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.