Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35637488›Full record

SynthesisBMC medicine2022

Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: a network meta-analysis.

Emmanouil Charitakis, Silvia Metelli, Lars O Karlsson, Antonios P Antoniadis, Konstantinos D Rizas, Ioan Liuba, Henrik Almroth, Anders Hassel Jönsson, Jonas Schwieler, Dimitrios Tsartsalis and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Cost Effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drugs for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Adverse events after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a comprehensive nationwide cohort study.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

14 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Emmanouil CharitakisDepartment of Cardiology and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. Emmanouil.charitakis@liu.se.ORCID 0000-0002-2514-5324
Silvia MetelliResearch Center of Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS-U1153), Université Paris Cité, INSERM, Paris, France.
Lars O KarlssonDepartment of Cardiology and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Antonios P Antoniadis3rd Cardiology Department, Hippokrateion General Hospital, Aristotle University Medical School, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Konstantinos D RizasMedizinische Klinik Und Poliklinik I, LMU Klinikum, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Ioan LiubaDepartment of Cardiology and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Henrik AlmrothDepartment of Cardiology and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Anders Hassel JönssonDepartment of Cardiology and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Jonas SchwielerHeart and Vascular Theme, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Dimitrios TsartsalisDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Hippokration Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Skevos SiderisDepartment of Cardiology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Hippokration Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Elena DragiotiPain and Rehabilitation Centre and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Nikolaos Fragakis3rd Cardiology Department, Hippokrateion General Hospital, Aristotle University Medical School, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Anna ChaimaniResearch Center of Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS-U1153), Université Paris Cité, INSERM, Paris, France.
Linköping University · SEInserm · FRIppokrateio General Hospital of Thessaloniki · GRHippocration General Hospital · GRKarolinska University Hospital · SELMU Klinikum · DENational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is no consensus on the most efficient catheter ablation (CA) strategy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of different CA strategies for AF ablation through network meta-analysis (NMA).

methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL was performed up to October 5th, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing different CA approaches were included. Efficacy was defined as arrhythmia recurrence after CA and safety as any reported complication related to the procedure during a minimum follow-up time of 6 months.

resultsIn total, 67 RCTs (n = 9871) comparing 19 different CA strategies were included. The risk of recurrence was significantly decreased compared to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone for PVI with renal denervation (RR: 0.60, CI: 0.38-0.94), PVI with ganglia-plexi ablation (RR: 0.62, CI: 0.41-0.94), PVI with additional ablation lines (RR: 0.8, CI: 0.68-0.95) and PVI in combination with bi-atrial modification (RR: 0.32, CI: 0.11-0.88). Strategies including PVI appeared superior to non-PVI strategies such as electrogram-based approaches. No significant differences in safety were observed.

conclusionsThis NMA showed that PVI in combination with additional CA strategies, such as autonomic modulation and additional lines, seem to increase the efficacy of PVI alone. These strategies can be considered in treating patients with AF, since, additionally, no differences in safety were observed. This study provides decision-makers with comprehensive and comparative evidence about the efficacy and safety of different CA strategies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registry number: CRD42020169494 .

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationCatheter AblationPulmonary VeinsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRegistriesAntiarrhythmic drugsAtrial fibrillationCatheter ablationEfficacyNetwork meta-analysisSafety

Identifiers

PMID35637488
PMCPMC9153169
OpenAlexW4281781885

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.