ArticleClinical cardiology2024
Single catheter approach for treatment of premature ventricular contractions.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Catheter ablation of premature ventricular contractions using an alternative vascular access and remote magnetic navigation (ARM) approach.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 · 2026Article
- Single catheter approach for treatment of premature ventricular contractions.Clinical cardiology · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCatheter ablation has become one of the main treatment strategies in patients with premature ventricular complexes (PVC). The successful mapping and ablation can be performed with an ablation catheter without additional diagnostic catheters. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that using a single catheter for PVC ablation may decrease complications, procedure time, and fluoroscopy exposure while maintaining comparable success rates.
methodsSixty-nine consecutive patients with PVC were treated with a single catheter approach compared to a historical cohort, in which a conventional setup was used. Propensity score matching was conducted with a 1:1 ratio. Outcome parameters included acute procedural success with elimination of all premature ventricular contractions after catheter ablation, procedural data as well as complication rates.
resultsPatients treated with a single catheter approach had shorter total procedure (60 minutes [IQR: 47,5-69,0 minutes] vs. 90 minutes [IQR 60-120 minutes]; p = 0.001) and fluoroscopy times (218 seconds [IQR: 110,5-446 seconds] vs. 310 seconds [IQR 190-640 seconds]; p = 0.012), which consecutively leads to a reduction of radiation exposure signified by a lower dose area product (155 cGycm² [IQR 74.4-334.5 cGycm²] vs. 368.4 cGycm² [IQR: 126-905.4 cGycm²]; p value 0.009). Acute procedural success rates were comparable in both groups (54 [84.3%] in the single catheter approach group and 58 [90.6%] in the conventional group; p: 0.287).
conclusionA single catheter approach for the treatment of PVC is associated with a reduction of procedure- and fluoroscopy time, as well as a lesser radiation exposure, while maintaining equivalent acute success and complication rates compared with a conventionally used catheter setup.
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.