ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Electrophysiological characteristics of epicardial breakthrough during catheter ablation of perimitral atrial flutter.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Unsuccessful endocardial ablation for perimitral atrial flutter (AFL) could be attributed by the epicardial bridging. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the electrophysiological characteristics of epicardial breakthrough during catheter ablation of perimitral AFL. Materials and methods: This retrospective study recruited 40 patients who received successful catheter ablation of perimitral AFL from January 2016 to June 2021. The patients were divided into two groups: group 1 ( Results: There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. In group 2, 60% of successful epicardial ablation was performed in intra-CS ablation and 40% in VOM ethanol infusion. Group 2 patients had a longer EGM interval of distal CS than that in group 1 (CS1-2: 64.2 17.5 vs. 42.4 0.09 ms, Conclusion: Longer EGM interval in distal CS during perimitral AFL was observed in perimitral AFL patients with epicardial breakthrough following endocardial-failed ablation, which may be associated with the need of epicardial ablation.
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.