ArticleInternational wound journal2024
Wound incidence and outcomes in atrial fibrillation: Comparing catheter ablation and anti-arrhythmic drug therapy.
Article in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- RETRACTION: Wound incidence and outcomes in atrial fibrillation: Comparing catheter ablation and anti-arrhythmic drug therapy.International wound journal · 2024Article
- Identification of potential biomarkers for atrial fibrillation and stable coronary artery disease based on WGCNA and machine algorithms.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- Wound incidence and outcomes in atrial fibrillation: Comparing catheter ablation and anti-arrhythmic drug therapy.International wound journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2024-09-03Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions · Compromised Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The most prevalent form of cardiac arrhythmia is atrial fibrillation (AF), which is typically managed through catheter ablation or anti-arrhythmic drug therapy. We compared the incidence and outcomes of wound complications in patients with atrial fibrillation who were treated with catheter ablation as opposed to anti-arrhythmic drug therapy. From May to November 2023, 240 adult AF patients who were treated with catheter ablation or anti-arrhythmic medications participated in a 6-month retrospective cohort study at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital in Hangzhou, China. An observation was made regarding 29 wound complications out of 240 patients. In comparison to drug therapy group, incidence of minor (8 vs. 11) and total complications (18 vs. 11) was greater in catheter ablation group. Significant adverse events occurred at higher rate in the catheter ablation group (6 versus 1) (p < 0.05). However, despite these patterns, there was no statistically significant difference in the rates of complications (total: p = 0.245; minor: p = 0.217; major: p = 0.128). Comparable treatment efficacy was observed across groups. In contrast to drug therapy, catheter ablation was associated with decreased probability of complications (odds ratio: 0.86), as determined by logistic regression; cardiac failure was a significant predictor of adverse outcomes. The study concluded that the risks of wound complications associated with catheter ablation and anti-arrhythmic drug therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation are comparable. Notwithstanding an elevated propensity for complications in ablation group, the statistical analysis indicated comparable safety profiles.
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.