ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2021
A narrative review of hybrid ablation for persistent and longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation.
Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. 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.
- Narrative Review: Surgical and Hybrid Management of Atrial Fibrillation.Cardiology and therapy · 2024Review
- Effectiveness of Maze IV procedure versus thoracoscopic ablation for atrial fibrillation: a propensity score-matched analysis.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Atrial fibrillation: Primary prevention, secondary prevention, and prevention of thromboembolic complications: Part 2.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation is the most common sustained arrhythmia and is characterized by rapid and irregular atrial activation with loss of atrial contraction. There has been a significant evolution of treatments over the past 30 years. Initially, cardiac surgeons developed approaches via sternotomy with superior efficacy, however early iterations of the procedure were associated with prolonged recovery time and frequent need for pacemaker placement. The current surgical approach to the maze procedure via sternotomy yields excellent efficacy and is a Class 1 recommendation for patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing a concomitant procedure. Several years following the initial development of the surgical maze procedure, cardiac electrophysiologists developed less invasive, however less efficacious catheter ablation options by percutaneous approach. Both the surgical and transcatheter approaches have their advantages and disadvantages with varying risks of complications and efficacy. Through the combination of expertise of cardiac surgeons paired with the electrophysiology team, a hybrid ablation procedure has been developed offering an increased efficacy with a less-invasive approach than the current gold standard treatment of Cox-maze IV procedure. This review will discuss the hybrid ablation procedure, review recent associated clinical trials, and discuss advantages and challenges associated with this multidisciplinary approach for management of patients with AF.
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.