ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2024
Ablation of Atrioventricular Nodal Reentrant Tachycardia with Focal Cryoablation, Compared with Radiofrequency Ablation: Single-Center Experience.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 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.
- How to Compare Clinical Outcomes between Cryoablation and Radiofrequency Ablation in Patients with Atrioventricular Nodal Reentrant Tachycardia?Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ablation of atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) with cryoablation is an alternative to radiofrequency (RF) ablation in patients due to the low risk of total atrioventricular block. An increase in early-late recurrences after cryoablation is reported as an important disadvantage.
objectivesIn this study, we aimed to compare the acute procedural success and the long-term recurrence rates of patients, with AVNRT who underwent methods.
methods73 patients with AVNRT were included in the study: 32 with cryoablation and 41 with RF ablation. There was no statistically significant difference between acute procedural success in methods. The ablation procedure was performed by an operator experienced in arrhythmology. The choice of RF or cryoablation was made in the electrophysiology laboratory based on the material already available during the procedure. After the procedure, the patients were evaluated every 3 months for 2 years in polyclinic control. The significance level adopted in the statistical analysis was 5%.
resultsThe 2 groups of patients were homogeneous. The fluoroscopy time (p<0.001) was shorter, but atrium-his (p=0.004) and his-ventricular (p=0.015) times were longer in the cryoablation group. There was no significant difference, in terms of acute procedural success, post-procedure jump without a single echo, and presence of echo and jump.
conclusionsCryoablation requires less fluoroscopy time and is a safe non-inferior alternative to RF ablation in patients with AVNRT. The risk of AV block is a significant problem with the use of RF energy, making it less suitable for use in young and physically active patients.
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.