Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39714902›Full record

ArticleJAMA cardiology2025

Intravascular Sympathetic Stimulation to Facilitate Catheter Ablation of Premature Ventricular Complexes.

Timothy M Markman, Cory M Tschabrunn, David Callans, Francis E Marchlinski, Saman Nazarian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Pharmacologic parasympathetic withdrawal to facilitate activation mapping and ablation of infrequent intraprocedural premature ventricular contractions.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 · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Timothy M MarkmanSection for Cardiac Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Cory M TschabrunnSection for Cardiac Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
David CallansSection for Cardiac Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Francis E MarchlinskiSection for Cardiac Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Saman NazarianSection for Cardiac Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Infrequent intraprocedural premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) limit the efficacy of catheter ablation. Intravascular stimulation of sympathetic nerves via vertebral veins (VVs) has been used to activate cardiac sympathetic tone and may promote PVCs. Objective: To characterize the ability of direct electrical sympathetic stimulation via VVs to induce PVCs at the time of catheter ablation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective case series involved adult patients undergoing catheter ablation of PVCs, with rare or absent PVCs despite standard provocation, at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania between 2022 and 2024. Stimulation was performed via the left VV (20 Hz, up to 25 mA). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was PVC frequency, assessed before, during, and after stimulation. A multilevel mixed-effects Poisson regression was used to compare the rate of PVCs during the procedure. Results: Fifteen patients (mean [SD] age, 60 [17] years; 10 male [71%]) had a mean (SD) preprocedure PVC burden of 16.3% (8.6%) (median [IQR], 17.0% [11.5%-21.5%]), and 7 of 15 had undergone at least 1 prior unsuccessful ablation. Provocation of PVCs was attempted with isoproterenol, atrial and ventricular burst pacing, and minimal sedation in all patients before VV stimulation. Throughout the 10-minute period before VV stimulation, patients had a mean (SD) of 1.3 (1.4) PVCs (median [IQR], 1.0 [0.0-2.5] PVCs). During VV stimulation, PVCs were noted in all patients (mean [SD], 8.2 [5.7] PVCs per minute; median [IQR], 6.0 [4.5-13.0] PVCs per minute). In the 10-minute period after VV stimulation, patients had a mean (SD) of 5.1 (6.6) PVCs per minute (median [IQR], 3.0 [0.5-6.5] PVCs per minute). After VV stimulation, ablation was guided by activation mapping in 7 patients and by pace mapping alone in the remaining patients. Postablation monitoring demonstrated a mean (SD) 1.3% (2.3%) burden of PVCs (median [IQR], 0.0% [0.0%-2.5%]), with 9 of 15 patients having less than 1% burden of PVCs. There were no adverse events related to VV stimulation. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that intravascular sympathetic stimulation via the VV can be used to safely provoke PVCs during catheter ablation.

Indexed as

Catheter AblationElectric StimulationSympathetic Nervous SystemVentricular Premature ComplexesAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID39714902
PMCPMC11904726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.