ReviewReviews in cardiovascular medicine2023
Catheter Ablation of Persistent AF-Where are We Now?
Review in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Very High-Power Short-Duration Radiofrequency Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of pulsed field ablation for cavotricuspid isthmus-dependent atrial flutter: A meta-analysis based on real-world evidence.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) is a diverse condition that includes various subtypes and underlying causes of arrhythmia. Progress made in catheter ablation technology in recent years has significantly enhanced the durability of ablation. Despite these advances however, the effectiveness of ablation in treating persistent AF is still relatively modest. Studies exploring the mechanisms behind persistent AF have identified substrate-driven focal and re-entrant sources within the atrial body as crucial in sustaining AF among individuals with persistent AF. Furthermore, the widespread adoption of atrial late gadolinium enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging and the ongoing refinement of invasive voltage mapping techniques have allowed for detailed assessment of fibrotic remodelling prior to or at the time of procedure. Translation into clinical practice, however, has yielded overall disappointing results. The clinical application of AF mapping in ablation procedures has not shown any substantial advantages beyond the use of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone and adjunct ablation of fibrotic areas has yielded conflicting results in recent randomized trials. The emergence of pulsed field ablation represents a welcome development in the field and several studies have demonstrated an enhanced safety profile and increased procedural efficiency with this non-thermal energy modality. Pulsed field ablation also holds promise for safe and efficient substrate ablation beyond the pulmonary veins, but further trials are needed to assess its impact on longer term success rates. Continued advancements in our comprehension of AF mechanisms, alongside ongoing developments in catheter technology aimed at safe formation of transmural lesions, are essential for achieving better clinical outcomes for patients with persistent AF.
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.