ArticleHeart and vessels2024
Atypical atrial flutter ablation: follow-up and predictors of arrhythmia recurrence.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Substrate ablation as concomitant treatment for left atrial macroreentrant tachycardia (SLICE-LAMRT): rationale and study design.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Ablation of atypical flutter using a dual-energy lattice-tip focal catheter and integrated mapping system: Addressing target tissue-form factor mismatch.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Atypical atrial flutter ablation: clinical practice on patient selection, mapping, ablation strategies, and procedural endpoints-results from a European Heart Rhythm Association survey.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 · 2025Article
- Peri-Mitral Atrial Tachycardia Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAblation techniques have evolved greatly with advances in high-density 3D mapping systems over the last few years. Some patients develop atypical atrial flutter (AAFL) after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). The data regarding follow-up after AAFL ablation as well as predictors of arrhythmia recurrence are lacking. This analysis aims to report procedure success rates and establish predictors of long-term success. METHODS AND
resultsThis retrospective cohort study included 45 patients (median age: 69 years; 40% female) who qualified for their first AAFL after PVI. The procedures were performed with the use of conventional ablation-index-guided ThermoCool Smarttouch SF and QDOT MICRO catheters. Freedom from arrhythmia recurrence was used as a primary end point. After 52 weeks of follow-up, 60% of patients suffered from arrhythmia recurrence, but over 70% of the studied cohort reported symptom improvement. In multivariate analysis, class I antiarrhythmics prescription (HR = 0.24 [95% CI 0.06-0.94], p = 0.04) was associated with the lack of arrhythmia recurrence during the follow-up, while cardioversion during procedure was associated with increased risk of arrhythmia recurrence (HR = 7.05 [95% CI 2.09-23.72], p = 0.002).
conclusionsLong-term success of AAFL ablation procedures is not satisfactory despite improvement in symptoms. Class I antiarrhythmics prescription at the discharge contributes to higher chances of sinus rhythm maintenance, whereas cardioversion during the procedure is related to increased risk of arrhythmia recurrence.
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.