ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024
Machine Learning-Based Identification of High-Risk Patterns in Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Outcomes.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common types of cardiac arrhythmias, often leading to serious health issues such as stroke, heart failure, and higher mortality rates. Its global impact is rising due to aging populations and growing comorbidities, creating an urgent need for more effective treatment methods. AF ablation, a key treatment option, has success rates that vary widely among patients. Conventional predictors of ablation outcomes, which primarily rely on sociodemographic and clinical factors, fall short of capturing the heterogeneity within patient populations, highlighting the potential for data-driven methods to provide deeper insights into procedural success. Objectives: To uncover meaningful patient subgroups based on AF ablation outcomes and identify diagnostic codes associated with failure. Methods: Machine learning clustering with must-link and cannot-link constraints was applied to electronic health records to discover meaningful clusters, revealing patient-specific factors influencing procedural success or failure. Statistical analyses, including chi-square tests, were used to identify diagnostic codes significantly associated with ablation failure. Results: Out of the 145 diagnostic codes examined, thirteen significant codes were identified and categorized into four primary risk groups, ranked by their impact on procedural outcomes: (1) direct contributors affecting cardiovascular health, (2) indirect factors that contribute to systemic stress, (3) complications related to anticoagulation and hemorrhagic risks that can impact bleeding management, and (4) broader health indicators reflecting a general health burden that reduce patients resilience to procedural stress. Conclusions: This study shows the importance of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular factors in AF ablation outcomes, emphasizing the need for a more comprehensive pre-procedural evaluation. It also contributes to the application of machine learning in personalized risk assessment for AF and advancing individualized care strategies that may improve ablation success.
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.