ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
Global Research Progress on Radiofrequency Ablation in Cardiology.
Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiofrequency Ablation for Chronic Pain: Mechanistic Insights and Emerging Innovations.Cureus · 2025Review
- Pulsed field ablation for pulmonary vein and left atrial posterior wall isolation in persistent atrial fibrillation: a narrative review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- 2025 International Expert Practical Guide on the Use of the Pentaspline Pulsed Field Ablation System in Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Procedures.Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology · 2025Review
- Risk stratification and management of arrhythmias in patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has become a cornerstone in treating cardiac arrhythmias, offering a minimally invasive approach to managing conditions such as atrial fibrillation, ventricular tachycardia, and other rhythm disorders. The historical evolution of RFA, from its early inception to its current state, underscores the technological advancements that have significantly enhanced its efficacy and safety. Global trends indicate a steady increase in the adoption of RFA, with notable research contributions from North America, Europe, and Asia. Comparative studies reveal outcome variability driven by differences in patient populations, procedural techniques, and healthcare infrastructures. Despite its success, RFA faces challenges, including complications related to the procedure, patient selection, and long-term efficacy. Emerging technologies, such as integrating artificial intelligence and enhanced imaging modalities, hold promise for overcoming these barriers and further refining the procedure. Gaps in current research are identified, particularly in understanding the long-term outcomes of RFA and its application in complex arrhythmias. The critical role of RFA in modern cardiology is emphasized, along with the potential for future innovations that could expand its therapeutic utility. This synthesis of the latest evidence provides valuable insights for optimizing the use of RFA in managing cardiac arrhythmias.
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.