Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34709451›Full record

ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2022

Patients' attitude towards a sham-controlled trial on pulmonary vein isolation in atrial fibrillation.

Tobias Uhe, Samira Beimel, Romy Langhammer, Tina Stegmann, Gerhard Hindricks, Ulrich Laufs, Nikolaos Dagres, Rolf Wachter

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tobias Uhe *Klinik und Poliklinik für Kardiologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04317, Leipzig, Germany. Tobias.Uhe@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2543-2427
Samira Beimel *Klinik und Poliklinik für Kardiologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04317, Leipzig, Germany.
Romy LanghammerKlinik und Poliklinik für Kardiologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04317, Leipzig, Germany.
Tina StegmannKlinik und Poliklinik für Kardiologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04317, Leipzig, Germany.
Gerhard HindricksAbteilung für Rhythmologie, Herzzentrum Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Ulrich LaufsKlinik und Poliklinik für Kardiologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04317, Leipzig, Germany.
Nikolaos DagresAbteilung für Rhythmologie, Herzzentrum Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Rolf WachterKlinik und Poliklinik für Kardiologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04317, Leipzig, Germany.
University Hospital Leipzig · DEDeutsches Herzzentrum der Charité · DEKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe interpretation of recent trials on pulmonary vein ablation (PVI) for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) is hampered by the lack of blinding and sham controls. The feasibility of a sham-controlled trial has been questioned. We aimed to assess the attitude of potential participants regarding a sham-controlled trial in a common AF-patient population planned for PVI.

methodsPatients in two tertiary care centres planned for PVI were asked for their current AF symptoms using the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy of Life (AFEQT) questionnaire 1 day before catheter ablation. Subsequently, the study design of a hypothetical sham-controlled PVI-study was introduced, and patients were asked for their agreement in participation. Telephone follow-up of the AFEQT questionnaire was conducted 3 months after PVI.

resultsOne hundred and ninety-six patients (mean age 64 ± 11 years, 63% male) were included. Seventy-nine (40%) patients expressed their agreement to participate in the hypothetical sham-controlled trial. An additional 7% agreed to participate if a cross-over option after three months was offered. Agreement rate was similar in patients with first and Redo-PVI and minimal, moderate or severe symptoms. Mean overall AFEQT at baseline was 55 ± 19 and improved by 25 ± 20 points after 3 months (p < 0.001 versus baseline).

conclusionWith a participation rate of 40% in potential study participants, a sham-controlled trial for pulmonary vein isolation seems feasible. Patient-reported symptom relief after pulmonary vein isolation is in accordance with previous randomized open studies. The benefit of PVI should be rigorously evaluated in a sham-controlled trial.

Indexed as

Catheter AblationPatient Acceptance of Health CareQuality of LifeResearch DesignAgedAtrial FibrillationFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPulmonary VeinsSurveys and QuestionnairesAtrial fibrillationCatheter ablationPulmonary vein isolationSham-controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID34709451
PMCPMC8766391
OpenAlexW3208144923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.