ArticleCJC open2025
First-line vs Second-Line Catheter Ablation Therapy for Patients with Atrial Fibrillation-Data from a National Multicentre Registry.
Article in CJC open, 2025. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: An early catheter ablation treatment strategy is effective for rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In clinical practice, most patients undergo catheter ablation as a second-line treatment, following a trial of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). We aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of AF catheter ablation performed as a first-line vs a second-line approach, based on data from the nationwide, multicentre Israeli Catheter Ablation Registry. Methods: Following AF catheter ablation, patients were stratified into 2 groups-first-line vs second-line therapy approaches. The second-line group included AF patients who were referred for catheter ablation following treatment with at least one AAD. The primary endpoint was the 1-year freedom from AF recurrence. The secondary endpoints included 1-year hospitalizations, death, cerebrovascular events, and the composite of adverse cardiac events. Results: The 923 participants had a mean age of 66 ± 4.5 years. Catheter ablation was performed as a first-line therapy in 192 patients (20.8%). Median times from AF diagnosis to catheter ablation were 1.5 and 3 years in the first- and second-line groups, respectively. Patients in the first-line group were younger, had a shorter AF duration, and more frequently had a normal left atrial size prior to the procedure. The primary endpoint of AF recurrence at 1 year did not differ significantly between the groups (24.9% vs 30%, Conclusions: Mildly delayed AF catheter ablation for patients with AF did not compromise the procedure's efficacy or safety.
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.