Observational studyCardiology journal2024
Safety and effectiveness of very-high-power, short-duration ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation: Preliminary results.
Observational study in Cardiology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Procedural Efficiency and Clinical Outcomes of a Region-Specific Radiofrequency Ablation Strategy for Pulmonary Vein Isolation.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Article
- High-power, very-high-power, and low-power radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Temperature-controlled Ablation Versus Conventional Ablation for Pulmonary Vein Isolation in the Treatment of AF: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2025Review
- The Impact of Regional Maximum Tolerated Interlesion Distance on the Long-Term Ablation Outcomes in Ablation Index Guided Pulmonary Vein Isolation for Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is at the forefront of rhythm control strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). A very-high-power, short-duration (vHPSD) catheter, QDot MicroTM (Biosense Webster) was designed to improve the effectiveness of AF ablation within a shorter procedure time. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of PVI ablation between this vHPSD ablation mode and conventional ablation-index-guided ablation (ThermoCool Smarttouch SF catheter).
methodsThis single-center, retrospective, observational study enrolled 108 patients with AF, referred for catheter ablation between December 16, 2019 and December 3, 2021. In 54 procedures (mean age: 58.0 ± 12.3; 66.67% male), a QDot MicroTM catheter was used (vHPSD-group), and 54 patients (mean age: 57.2 ± 11.8; 70.37% male) were treated with a ThermoCool SmarttouchTM SF catheter (AI-group). The primary endpoint was freedom from AF 3 months after ablation.
resultsAtrial fibrillation was found to recur in 14.81% of patients in the vHPSD-group and in 31.48% of patients in the AI-group (p = 0.07). There was no difference in treatment-emergent adverse events between the two groups (6.3% vs. 0%; p = 0.10). One severe adverse event (a cerebral vascular accident) was observed in the vHPSD-group. The mean dose of remifentanil was reported to be lower during QDot MicroTM catheter-based PVI (p < 0.01). The vHPSD-based PVI was associated with shorter radiofrequency application time (p < 0.001), fluoroscopy time (p < 0.0001), and total procedure time (p < 0.0001).
conclusionsThis study suggests vHPSD ablation is safe, can reduce the dosage of analgesics during significantly shorter procedures and may enhance the success rate of catheter-based PVI.
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.