Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36006664›Full record

ArticleEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2023

AFA-Recur: an ESC EORP AFA-LT registry machine-learning web calculator predicting atrial fibrillation recurrence after ablation.

Andrea Saglietto, Fiorenzo Gaita, Carina Blomstrom-Lundqvist, Elena Arbelo, Nikolaos Dagres, Josep Brugada, Aldo Pietro Maggioni, Luigi Tavazzi, Josef Kautzner, Gaetano Maria De Ferrari and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Machine learning prediction of outcome following pulsed-field atrial fibrillation ablation: patient selection and risk factors.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 · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Repeat ablation strategies in atrial fibrillation patients with durably isolated pulmonary veins: insights from the Netherlands Heart Registration.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Brazilian Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines - 2025.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Andrea SagliettoDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medical Sciences, 'Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino' Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9475-1507
Fiorenzo GaitaCardiology Unit, J Medical, Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3178-6205
Carina Blomstrom-LundqvistDepartment of Medical Science and Cardiology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-2806-3903
Elena ArbeloDepartment of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Institut, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-0424-6393
Nikolaos DagresDepartment of Electrophysiology, Heart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0323-4956
Josep BrugadaHospital Clínic Pediatric Arrhythmia Unit, Cardiovascular Institute, Hospital Sant Joan de Déu University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5662-8302
Aldo Pietro MaggioniEURObservational Research Programme (EORP), European Society of Cardiology, Sophia-Antipolis, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2764-6779
Luigi TavazziCardiovascular Department, Maria Cecilia Hospital, GVM Care & Research, Cotignola, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4448-5209
Josef KautznerDepartment of Cardiology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (ΙΚΕΜ), Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-1632-6182
Gaetano Maria De FerrariDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medical Sciences, 'Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino' Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4940-0876
Matteo AnselminoDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medical Sciences, 'Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino' Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6311-4270
University of Turin · ITCentro de Investigación en Red en Enfermedades Cardiovasculares · ESEuropean Society of Cardiology · FRHospital Sant Joan de Déu Barcelona · ESInstitute of Clinical and Experimental Medicine · CZLeipzig Heart Institute · DEMaria Cecilia Hospital · ITUppsala University · SE

Funding

Abbott Vascular IntAmgen CardiovascularAstraZenecaBayer AGBoehringer IngelheimDaiichi Sankyo Europe GmbHGedeon Richter PlcMenarini Int. OpMSD-Merck & CoNovartis PharmaResMedSanofiServierThe Alliance Daiichi Sankyo Europe GmbH and Eli Lilly and CompanyThe Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer AllianceVifor
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAtrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence during the first year after catheter ablation remains common. Patient-specific prediction of arrhythmic recurrence would improve patient selection, and, potentially, avoid futile interventions. Available prediction algorithms, however, achieve unsatisfactory performance. Aim of the present study was to derive from ESC-EHRA Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term Registry (AFA-LT) a machine-learning scoring system based on pre-procedural, easily accessible clinical variables to predict the probability of 1-year arrhythmic recurrence after catheter ablation. METHODS AND

resultsPatients were randomly split into a training (80%) and a testing cohort (20%). Four different supervised machine-learning models (decision tree, random forest, AdaBoost, and k-nearest neighbour) were developed on the training cohort and hyperparameters were tuned using 10-fold cross validation. The model with the best discriminative performance on the testing cohort (area under the curve-AUC) was selected and underwent further optimization, including re-calibration. A total of 3128 patients were included. The random forest model showed the best performance on the testing cohort; a 19-variable version achieved good discriminative performance [AUC 0.721, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.680-0.764], outperforming existing scores (e.g. APPLE score: AUC 0.557, 95% CI 0.506-0.607). Platt scaling was used to calibrate the model. The final calibrated model was implemented in a web calculator, freely available at http://afarec.hpc4ai.unito.it/.

conclusionAFA-Recur, a machine-learning-based probability score predicting 1-year risk of recurrent atrial arrhythmia after AF ablation, achieved good predictive performance, significantly better than currently available tools. The calculator, freely available online, allows patient-specific predictions, favouring tailored therapeutic approaches for the individual patient.

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationCatheter AblationHumansMachine LearningRecurrenceRegistriesRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeAtrial fibrillationMachine learningPredictorsRecurrenceTranscatheter ablation

Identifiers

PMID36006664
PMCPMC10103564
OpenAlexW4293102882

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.