ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2022
Very High-Power Short-Duration (HPSD) Ablation for Pulmonary Vein Isolation: Short and Long-Term Outcome Data.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-power, very-high-power, and low-power radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Pulmonary Vein Isolation for Atrial Fibrillation: Comparison of a Very High-Power Very Short-Duration (vHPvSD) Ablation Protocol versus a Hybrid Ablation Approach-Procedural and Mid-Term Outcome Data.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- New Perspectives on Risk Stratification and Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: An Analysis of Recent Contributions on theJournal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Article
- Very-high-power Short-duration Ablation versus Conventional Ablation for Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Atrial Fibrillation: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCircumferential pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a standard of care intervention for patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). During follow-up, a substantial number of patients need a redo procedure due to reconnections on the basis of insufficient non-transmural ablation lesions. High-power short-duration ablation (HPSD) is expected to create efficient lesions while causing fewer complications than in conventional RFA settings. The aim of this study was to compare one-year outcome data of very HPSD (90 Watt, 4 s) to a strategy using 50 Watt HPSD ablation guided by the CLOSE protocol using the Ablation Index (AI), an arbitrary unit composed of power, contact force and ablation time.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed short and long-term (median follow-up 23.2 ± 9.9 months) outcome data from 52 patients that were scheduled for first-do-symptomatic PVI. A very HPSD ablation protocol with 90 Watt and a 4 s duration cut-off was compared to an HPSD CLOSE approach (50 Watts; AI 550 at the anterior LA wall; AI 400 at the posterior LA wall, the roof and the floor) in terms of freedom from AF recurrence in a long-term electrocardiogram (ECG) over a five days surveillance period. To gain an impression of the subjective sense of wellbeing, the Atrial Fibrillation Effects on QualiTy-of-Life (AFEQT) score was recorded.
resultsOverall freedom from AF was found in 81% (90 W 4 s) vs. 87.5% (50 W), (
conclusionWithin our relatively small studied population, we found hints that in addition to shortening ablation times and radiation exposure without significantly increasing the rate of relevant intraprocedural complications, very high power short-duration ablation (90 W 4 s) provides comparable efficacy rates after one year.
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.