Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33570717›Full record

ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2022

Impact of ablation index settings on pulmonary vein reconnection.

A Lepillier, T Strisciuglio, E De Ruvo, M Scaglione, M Anselmino, F A Sebag, D Pecora, M M Gallagher, M Rillo, G Viola and 10 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

A LepillierCentre Cardiologique du Nord, St Denis, Paris, France.
T StrisciuglioClinica Montevergine, Mercogliano, Avellino, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5928-1669
E De RuvoPoliclinico Casilino, Roma, Italy.
M ScaglioneOspedale Cardinal Massaia, Asti, Italy.
M AnselminoA.O.U. Citta della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
F A SebagInstitut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.
D PecoraFondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.
M M GallagherSt George's Hospital, London, UK.
M RilloCasa di Cura Villa Verde, Taranto, Italy.
G ViolaOspedale San Francesco, Nuoro, Italy.
E PisanòOspedale Vito Fazzi, Lecce, Italy.
S AbbeyHôpital Privé Du Confluent (HPCN), Nantes, France.
F LambertiOspedale Sant'Eugenio, Roma, Italy.
A PaniOspedale di Lecco, Lecco, Italy.
G ZucchelliAzienda Ospedaliera Pisana, Pisa, Italy.
G SgaritoA.R.N.A.S. Civico Cristina Benfratelli, Palermo, Italy.
A De SimoneClinica San Michele, via Montella 16, 81024, Maddaloni, Caserta, Italy.
E BertagliaDepartment of Cardiac, Thoracic, and Vascular Sciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
F SolimeneClinica Montevergine, Mercogliano, Avellino, Italy.
Giuseppe StabileClinica Montevergine, Mercogliano, Avellino, Italy. gmrstabile@tin.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAblation index (AI) is a radiofrequency lesion quality marker. The AI value that allows effective and safe pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is still debated. We evaluated the incidence of acute and late PV reconnection (PVR) with different AI settings and its predictors.

methodsThe Ablation Index Registry is a multicenter study that included patients with paroxysmal/persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent first-time ablation. Each operator performed the ablation using his preferred ablation catheter (ThermoCool® SmartTouch or Surround Flow) and AI setting (380 posterior-500 anterior and 330 posterior-450 anterior). We divided the study population into two groups according to the AI setting used: group 1 (330-450) and group 2 (380-500). Incidence of acute PVR was validated within 30 min after PVI, whereas the incidence of late PVR was evaluated at repeat procedure.

resultsOverall, 490 patients were divided into groups 1 (258) and 2 (232). There was no significant difference in the procedural time, fluoroscopy time, and rate of the first-pass PVI between the two study groups. Acute PVR was observed in 5.6% PVs. The rate of acute PVR was slightly higher in group 2 (64/943, 6.8%, PVs) than in group 1 (48/1045, 4.6% PVs, p = 0.04). Thirty patients (6%) underwent a repeat procedure and late PVR was observed in 57/116 (49%) PVs (number of reconnected PV per patient of 1.9 ± 1.6). A similar rate of late PVR was found in the two study groups. No predictors of acute and late PVR were found.

conclusionAblation with a lower range of AI is highly effective and is not associated with a higher rate of acute and late PVR. No predictors of PV reconnection were found.

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationCatheter AblationPulmonary VeinsHumansRecurrenceTreatment OutcomeAblation indexAtrial fibrillationCatheter ablationPulmonary vein reconnection

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.