ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2025
Quantitative analyses of the distal bipolar electrogram for focal premature ventricular contraction ablation.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 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.
- Not Premature to Quantitatively Define the Near-Field Bipolar Electrogram for Premature Ventricular Contraction Ablation.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
- Critical appraisal of electrogram-based depth estimation and lesion assessment in ventricular ablation.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
- Quantitative metrics of bipolar electrograms predict ablation success in focal PVCs.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
- Quantitative analyses of the distal bipolar electrogram for focal premature ventricular contraction ablation.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Accurate interpretation of the distal bipolar electrogram (bi-EGM) is essential for successful ablation of idiopathic focal PVC. Sharp, early, and fractionated bi-EGM is often considered to be near-field and targeted, but in an empiric fashion rather than by quantitative criteria. Objectives: To quantify the distal bi-EGM with five parameters to elucidate quantitative criteria distinguishing near-field from far-field bi-EGM. Methods: The distal bi-EGM was quantified and analyzed using: half time of activation ( Results: Among 41 patients, 26 were ablated successfully and 15 unsuccessfully. Conclusion:
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.