ReviewCirculation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology2024
Mechanistic Insights From Trials of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: Charting a Course for the Future.
Review in Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02997254 (COMparison of Physiological Algorithms for Real-time Evaluation of Atrial Fibrillation), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
COMparison of Physiological Algorithms for Real-time Evaluation of Atrial Fibrillation
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Convergent Hybrid Ablation Versus Catheter Ablation in Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure: HALT AF Study Protocol and Rationale for a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Article
- Ablation of atrial fibrillation sources identified through sequential high-density mapping: in silico comparison against anatomy-based approaches.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
- Article
- Advances in Atrial Fibrillation Management: A Guide for General Internists.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Success rates for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF), particularly persistent AF, remain suboptimal. Pulmonary vein isolation has been the cornerstone for catheter ablation of AF for over a decade. While successful for most patients, pulmonary vein isolation alone is still insufficient for a substantial minority. Frustratingly, multiple clinical trials testing a diverse array of additional ablation approaches have led to mixed results, with no current strategy that improves AF outcomes beyond pulmonary vein isolation in all patients. Nevertheless, this large collection of data could be used to extract important insights regarding AF mechanisms and the diversity of the AF syndrome. Mechanistically, the general model for arrhythmogenesis prompts the need for tools to individually assess triggers, drivers, and substrates in individual patients. A key goal is to identify those who will not respond to pulmonary vein isolation, with novel approaches to phenotyping that may include mapping to identify alternative drivers or critical substrates. This, in turn, can allow for the implementation of phenotype-based, targeted approaches that may categorize patients into groups who would or would not be likely to respond to catheter ablation, pharmacological therapy, and risk factor modification programs. One major goal is to predict individuals in whom additional empirical ablation, while feasible, may be futile or lead to atrial scarring or proarrhythmia. This work attempts to integrate key lessons from successful and failed trials of catheter ablation, as well as models of AF, to suggest future paradigms 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.