ReviewArrhythmia & electrophysiology review2022
Contemporary Management of Complex Ventricular Arrhythmias.
Review in Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review, 2022. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of non-invasive electrocardiographic imaging in scar-dependent ventricular tachycardia: relationship to arrhythmogenic substrate and imaging defined scar.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 · 2026Article
- The Integral Role of Cardiac Imaging in the Electrophysiology Field.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2025Review
- Functional Substrate Mapping: A New Frontier in the Treatment of Ventricular Tachycardia in Structural Heart Disease.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2024Review
- Procedural Adaptations to Avoid Haemodynamic Instability During Catheter Ablation of Scar-related Ventricular Tachycardia.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2023Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous catheter ablation is an effective and safe therapy that can eliminate ventricular tachycardia, reducing the risks of both recurrent arrhythmia and shock therapies from a defibrillator. Successful ablation requires accurate identification of arrhythmic substrate and the effective delivery of energy to the targeted tissue. A thorough pre-procedural assessment is needed before considered 3D electroanatomical mapping can be performed. In contemporary practice, this must combine traditional electrophysiological techniques, such as activation and entrainment mapping, with more novel physiological mapping techniques for which there is an ever-increasing evidence base. Novel techniques to maximise energy delivery to the tissue must also be considered and balanced against their associated risks of complication. This review provides a comprehensive appraisal of contemporary practice and the evidence base that supports recent developments in mapping and ablation, while also considering potential future developments in the field.
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.