ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2025
Cryoballoon Ablation of the Left Common Pulmonary Vein Using a Size-Adjustable Cryoballoon: A Comparative Study.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Japan: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Circulation reports · 2026Review
- Cryoballoon Ablation of the Left Common Pulmonary Vein Using a Size-Adjustable Cryoballoon: A Comparative Study.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
- Cryoablation for atrial fibrillation: biophysics and a contemporary step-by-step approach.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The efficacy of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) using a 28-mm or 31-mm cryoballoon for isolating the left common pulmonary vein (LCPV) remains poorly established. We aimed to evaluate procedural outcomes and long-term follow-up data of CBA for the LCPV using either POLARx with a fixed 28-mm cryoballoon or POLARx FIT with a size-adjustable 28-mm or 31-mm cryoballoon. Methods: Patients with LCPV who underwent CBA for atrial fibrillation using POLARx or POLARx FIT between January 2022 and April 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Procedural outcomes and long-term follow-up data were compared between the POLARx and POLARx FIT groups. Results: Fifty-one patients (32 males [62.7%]; mean age, 66 ± 11.6 years) were analyzed. The POLARx group included 23 patients, and the POLARx FIT group included 28 patients. First-freeze pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) success was 1 (4.3%) versus 8 (28.6%) ( Conclusions: POLARx FIT was useful for LCPV isolation, with a higher first-freeze PVI success rate, fewer applications, and shorter total freezing time compared to POLARx.
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.