ReviewJournal of Zhejiang University. Science. B2021
Current progress of computational modeling for guiding clinical atrial fibrillation ablation.
Review in Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of Computational Modelling in Enhancing Thermal Safety During Cardiac Ablation.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Review
- Fast interactive simulations of cardiac electrical activity in anatomically accurate heart structures by compressing sparse uniform cartesian grids.Computer methods and programs in biomedicine · 2024Article
- Index of microcirculatory resistance: state-of-the-art and potential applications in computational simulation of coronary artery disease.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2022Article
- How synergy between mechanistic and statistical models is impacting research in atrial fibrillation.Frontiers in physiology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common arrhythmias, associated with high morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs, and it places a significant burden on both individuals and society. Anti-arrhythmic drugs are the most commonly used strategy for treating AF. However, drug therapy faces challenges because of its limited efficacy and potential side effects. Catheter ablation is widely used as an alternative treatment for AF. Nevertheless, because the mechanism of AF is not fully understood, the recurrence rate after ablation remains high. In addition, the outcomes of ablation can vary significantly between medical institutions and patients, especially for persistent AF. Therefore, the issue of which ablation strategy is optimal is still far from settled. Computational modeling has the advantages of repeatable operation, low cost, freedom from risk, and complete control, and is a useful tool for not only predicting the results of different ablation strategies on the same model but also finding optimal personalized ablation targets for clinical reference and even guidance. This review summarizes three-dimensional computational modeling simulations of catheter ablation for AF, from the early-stage attempts such as Maze III or circumferential pulmonary vein isolation to the latest advances based on personalized substrate-guided ablation. Finally, we summarize current developments and challenges and provide our perspectives and suggestions for future directions.
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.