ReviewCureus2024
Treatment Outcomes of Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) management has witnessed a paradigm shift, with an increasing emphasis on rhythm control strategies. This systematic review aims to comprehensively assess and compare the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation versus medical therapy in the treatment of AF. A systematic search was conducted across major electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, from inception to the present. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing catheter ablation with medical therapy for AF were included. The primary outcomes included rhythm control success, recurrence rates, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes encompassed quality of life, hospitalization rates, and mortality. A total of six studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 2,859 participants. Catheter ablation significantly improved rhythm control success compared to medical therapy. Subgroup analyses demonstrated variations in outcomes based on patient characteristics, procedural techniques, and follow-up durations. Recurrence rates favored ablation; however, ablation was associated with a higher incidence of minor complications and major adverse events. Catheter ablation demonstrates superior efficacy in achieving and maintaining rhythm control compared to medical therapy in the management of AF. Despite the increased risk of procedural complications, the overall safety profile remains acceptable. This systematic review provides valuable insights for clinicians and informs shared decision-making between patients and healthcare providers when choosing between catheter ablation and medical therapy for AF treatment.
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.