ArticleHeart rhythm O22020
Atrioventricular junctional ablation: The good, the bad, the better.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring Anti-Inflammatory Treatment as Upstream Therapy in the Management of Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Current Advance, Challenges and Future Perspectives of Conduction System Pacing.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Electroanatomic mapping in atrioventricular junction ablation during sinus rhythm for tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome with persistent left superior vena cava.Journal of arrhythmia · 2022Article
- The Role of High-output His-bundle Pacing During Atrioventricular Node Ablation.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2022Article
- Anatomy for ablation of atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia and accessory pathways.Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2022Review
- State of the Journal 2021:Heart rhythm O2 · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe management of patients with atrial fibrillation and an abnormally fast ventricular response has been through the use of pharmacologic agents. In those cases where rate control cannot be achieved pharmacologically, a standard approach has been atrioventricular (AV) junctional ablation and ventricular pacemaker implantation to achieve a stable ventricular rate. Long-term ventricular pacing has been shown to result in diminished ventricular function that can lead to heart failure.
objectiveTo describe an experimental and clinical study demonstrating a modified form of AV junction ablation.
methodsAblation of the slow and fast AV nodal input does not produce AV block. Ablation of the connection between the two induces AV block, leaving the AV node and His bundle intact.
resultsSubsequently the escape heart rate is close to normal and responds well to exercise.
conclusionIn a clinical study with a 42 month follow-up, the modified procedure resulted in significantly reduced pacemaker dependence and mortality compared to the standard AV ablation procedure.
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.