ArticleIndian pacing and electrophysiology journal
Optimal strategy for very high-power short-duration atrial fibrillation ablation: Acute efficacy and safety of pulmonary vein and box isolation.
Article in Indian pacing and electrophysiology journal. 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.
- The hotter and shorter the better? Strategy comparison for atrial fibrillation ablation using high power short duration settings.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe optimal strategy for very high-power short-duration (vHPSD) ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. Data regarding the application of box isolation (BOXI) and its complications, particularly, pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS), remain scarce. We aimed to determine the optimal strategy for vHPSD in AF ablation by focusing on pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and BOXI and assessing the acute efficacy and safety.
methodsPatients with drug-refractory AF (n = 97) were divided into two groups: Strategy 1 (n = 50; 90 W for 4 s with PVI for the bottom line and 50 W with an ablation index [AI] of 450 for the roof line) and Strategy 2 (n = 47; based on the outcomes of Strategy 1, using AI-guided ablation). The acute efficacy and safety were compared between the groups. Pre- and post-ablation imaging was conducted to assess PVS.
resultsStrategy 1 yielded first-pass isolation (FPI) rates of 62.5 % (PVI) and 72 % (BOXI). The weak points were the thick parts of the atrial wall and the parts with epicardial connections. Strategy 2, which was improved by AI guidance, increased the FPI rates to 97.5 % (PVI) and 95 % (BOXI) and reduced the procedural and fluoroscopy times, respectively. Follow-up imaging showed that the PVS incidence remained low and did not significantly differ between the strategies.
conclusionAI-guided ablation enhanced the efficacy of vHPSD for PVI and BOXI in Strategy 2. Furthermore, our assessment of PVS demonstrated that vHPSD maintains a favorable safety profile with a low PVS incidence.
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.