ArticleCardiology journal2024
Cryoballoon ablation without use of contrast for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
Article in Cardiology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Efficacy and Safety of Catheter Ablation for Atrial Arrhythmias in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Single-Center Experience.Clinical cardiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCryoballoon ablation (CBA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is usually preceded by demonstrating pulmonary vein (PV) occlusion using contrast. The aim of the study was to determine efficacy and safety of a simplified protocol for CBA performed without demonstrating PV occlusion and compare achieved results with conventional CBA.
methodsParoxysmal AF patients undergoing a first-time CBA were prospectively included. In the non-contrast (NC) group CBA was performed using standardized protocol without demonstrating PV occlusion. In the conventional contrast (CC) group ablations were performed after confirmation of PV occlusion.
resultsThe NC and CC groups comprised 51 and 22 patients, respectively. PVI according to the group assignment was achieved in 34 (67%) and 21 (95.5%) patients from the NC and CC groups, respectively (p < 0.001). In the NC group, 184 (90%) out of 204 veins were isolated without venography. There were no differences between the NC and CC groups in terms of procedure duration (89.7 ± 22.6 vs. 90.0 ± 20.6 min; p = 0.7) and fluoroscopy time (15.3 ± 6.3 vs. 15 ± 4.5 min; p = 0.8). In the NC group, the use of contrast was significantly lower compared to the CC group (4.9 ± 10.1 vs. 19.4 ± 8.6 mL, p < 0.001). There were no serious adverse events in both groups. A 1-year freedom from AF was achieved in 73.5% and 71.5% of patients from the NC and CC groups, respectively (p = 1).
conclusionsCryoballoon ablation without demonstrating vein occlusion with contrast is safe and feasible. Proposed simplified approach enables isolation of the vast majority of pulmonary veins with a significant reduction in the amount of contrast used.
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.