ArticleHeart rhythm O22025
Reduced continuity index with proactive esophageal cooling compared to luminal temperature monitoring during radiofrequency ablation.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2025. 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.
- Proactive esophageal cooling during radiofrequency cardiac ablation: data update including applications in very high-power short duration ablation.Expert review of medical devices · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Proactive esophageal cooling is Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cleared to reduce the likelihood of esophageal injury during radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Long-term follow-up data have also shown improved freedom from arrhythmia with proactive esophageal cooling compared with luminal esophageal temperature (LET) monitoring during pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). One hypothesized mechanism is improved lesion contiguity (as measured by the continuity index) with the use of cooling. Objective: We aimed to compare the continuity index of PVI cases using proactive esophageal cooling with those using LET monitoring. Methods: We calculated the continuity index for PVI cases at 2 different hospitals within the same health system, using a slightly modified continuity index to facilitate retrospective determination from review of recorded cases. The results were then compared between cases using proactive esophageal cooling and those using LET monitoring. Results: Continuity Indices for a total of 236 cases were determined: 118 cases using proactive esophageal cooling and 118 cases using traditional LET monitoring. With proactive esophageal cooling, the average continuity index was 10.6 (5.6 on the left pulmonary vein and 4.9 on the right pulmonary vein). With LET monitoring, the average continuity index was 37.0 (18.7 on the left and 18.3 on the right), for a difference of 26.4 ( Conclusion: Proactive esophageal cooling during PVI is associated with significantly improved lesion contiguity when compared with LET monitoring. This finding may offer a mechanism for the greater freedom from arrhythmia seen with proactive cooling in long-term follow-up.
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.