ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2024
The effect of different power radiofrequency ablations in treatment and postoperative pain in patients with atrial fibrillation: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 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.
- Impact of Routine Postoperative Care Versus Nurse-Led Lifestyle Interventions on Patient Outcomes After Radiofrequency Ablation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.The Journal of cardiovascular nursingTrial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere has been no consensus on what power of radiofrequency energy can be used to produce the best surgical results in patients with atrial fibrillation. In addition, patients undergoing local anesthesia and fentanyl analgesia may experience pain when radiofrequency ablation is performed. This study investigated the effect of different power radiofrequency ablations in treatment and postoperative pain in patients with atrial fibrillation.
methodsA retrospective study was performed with 60 patients who underwent radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation between January and June 2023. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the power of the radiofrequency ablation catheter used, with 30 patients in the conventional power group (35 W) and 30 patients in the high-power group (50 W). The cardiac electrophysiological indexes and postoperative pain of the 2 groups were compared.
resultsMost of the procedural key parameters between the 2 groups had no significant differences. However, the total application time during radiofrequency ablation and pulmonary vein isolation time in the high-power group were significantly shorter than those in the conventional power group (p < 0.001). Patients in the high-power group reported significantly less pain than those in the conventional power group in the immediate postoperative period and the late postoperative period (p < 0.001).
conclusionsHigh-power radiofrequency ablation showed a shorter treatment time, and could reduce postoperative pain compared to conventional power ablation.
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.