ArticleJACC. Asia2025
Multicenter Practice of Non/Minimized Fluoroscopy Ablation for Paroxysmal AF in China: The PAF-ICE Trial.
Article in JACC. Asia, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntracardiac echocardiography (ICE)-guided non/minimized-fluoroscopy catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) has been reported, but its effectiveness and safety still lack multicenter evidence.
objectivesThe authors sought to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ICE-guided non/minimized-fluoroscopy catheter ablation compared with the traditional fluoroscopy-guided approach in patients with paroxysmal AF.
methodsA total of 448 patients with paroxysmal AF, from 15 centers in China, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a non/minimized-fluoroscopy group (n = 223) and a traditional approach group (n = 225). The primary efficacy endpoint was freedom from AF recurrence after a single ablation procedure. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of death from any cause, stroke or transient ischemic attack, and other serious adverse events.
resultsPulmonary vein isolation was achieved in all patients. After a median follow-up of 12.2 (Q1-Q3: 8.8-17.7) months, 184 of 223 patients (82.5%) in the non/minimized-fluoroscopy group and 189 of 225 (84.0%) in the traditional approach group remained free from arrhythmia. Cox analysis showed a HR of 0.949 (95% CI: 0.774 to 1.164); P = 0.858, demonstrating the noninferiority of the non/minimized-fluoroscopy approach. The primary safety endpoint did not differ significantly in the 2 groups (P = 0.975). This protocol enabled near zero-radiation procedures (mean <1 mGy) in 7 of 15 centers (46.7%), and radiation-free AF ablation in 125 of 223 patients (56.1%), significantly reducing x-ray exposure and operator radiation protection equipment usage.
conclusionsICE-combined non/minimized-fluoroscopy AF ablation was noninferior in effectiveness compared to traditional AF ablation, with no significant difference in safety endpoints, indicating its potential of widespread adoption.
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.