ReviewJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2024
Contact-force local impedance algorithm to guide effective pulmonary vein isolation in AF patients: 1-year outcome from an international multicenter clinical setting.
Review in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03793998 (Catheter Ablation of Arrhythmias With High Density Mapping System in the Real World Practice. The CHARISMA Study), which is not on this 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.
Catheter Ablation of Arrhythmias With High Density Mapping System in the Real World Practice. The CHARISMA Study
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Local multifrequency impedance changes after radiofrequency ablation in human atria: potential use for tissue characterization.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Catheter Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation: Recent Advances.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe combination of highly localized impedance (LI) and contact force (CF) may improve tissue characterization and lesion prediction during radiofrequency (RF) pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).
objectiveWe report the outcomes of our acute and long-term clinical evaluation of CF-LI-guided PVI in consecutive AF ablation cases from an international multicenter clinical setting.
methodsThree hundred twenty-four consecutive patients from 20 European centers undergoing RF catheter ablation with the Stablepoint™ catheter were enrolled in the CHARISMA registry. Of these, 275 had a minimum follow-up of 1 year and were included in the primary analysis.
resultsThe mean procedure duration was 115 ± 47 min, and the mean fluoroscopy time was 9.9 ± 6 min. At the end of the procedures, all PVs had been successfully isolated in all study patients. Minor complications were reported in 12 patients (4.4%). At 1 year, 36 (13.1%) patients had had an AF recurrence, and freedom from antiarrhythmic drugs and AF recurrence was achieved in 228 (82.9%) patients. The recurrence rate was higher in patients with persistent AF (21/116, 18.1%) than in those with paroxysmal AF (15/159, 9.4%; p = 0.0459). On multivariate logistic analysis adjusted for baseline confounders, only time > 6 months from first diagnosis of AF to ablation (HR = 2.93, 95%CI 1.03 to 8.36, p = 0.0459) was independently associated with recurrences.
conclusionAn ablation strategy for PVI guided by CF-LI technology proved safe and effective and resulted in a low recurrence rate of AF over 1-year follow-up, irrespective of the underlying AF type. CLINICAL
trial registrationCatheter Ablation of Arrhythmias with a High-Density Mapping System in Real-World Practice. (CHARISMA). URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ Identifier: NCT03793998.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38972960What 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.