ArticleHerzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie2021
Radiation exposure in cryoballoon ablation compared to radiofrequency ablation with three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping in atrial fibrillation patients.
Article in Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCatheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an established treatment to control symptoms. AF ablation either by cryoballoon or radiofrequency using three-dimensional (3D) electroanatomical mapping exposes patients and medical staff to increased doses of radiation.
aimTo compare radiation exposure in patients during cryoballoon ablation compared to 3D electro-anatomic mapping catheter ablation in AF patients.
methodsA total of 30 patients referred for AF ablation underwent full history taking, 12-lead ECG, echocardiogram, and pulmonary vein isolation either by 3D mapping system or cryoballoon. Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were collected and analyzed. Radiation exposure was measured using thermoluminescent dosimeters placed at different sites related to patients and medical staff.
resultThe procedural time was statistically significantly longer with 3D mapping compared to cryoballoon but showed no significant difference regarding fluoroscopy time. There was a significantly higher radiation skin dose at the right scapular area in the cryoballoon ablation group, in addition to higher peak skin dose compared to the 3D mapping ablation group. There was no statistically significant correlation between peak skin doses and fluoroscopy duration but a statistically significant correlation between peak skin dose and usage of high frame rate and the high dose area product.
conclusionCryoballoon ablation was found to be associated with higher peak skin radiation doses especially in the right scapular area. Knowing dose area product and peak skin dose is more important than fluoroscopy time 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.