ArticleJournal of cardiovascular electrophysiology2026
Outcomes of Focused Double Extrastimuli Mapping and Ablation in Ventricular Tachycardia.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology, 2026. 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.
- Outcomes of Focused Double Extrastimuli Mapping and Ablation in Ventricular Tachycardia.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConventional substrate mapping for scar-related ventricular tachycardia (VT) often fails to fully delineate critical arrhythmogenic components. Functional mapping strategies using extrastimuli have shown promise but are limited by procedural complexity.
methodsIn total, 57 patients undergoing VT ablation between March 2023 and October 2024 were included in the study. Patients were grouped based on whether targeted double extrastimuli mapping (focused DEMAP) was used to guide mapping and ablation. Mapping was performed using EnSite X with omnipolar technology. Clinical and procedural outcomes were compared between focused DEMAP and non-DEMAP groups with outcomes follow-up at 12 months.
resultsFocused DEMAP revealed a significantly higher correlation between DZs and VT critical isthmuses compared to sinus rhythm mapping (75.9% vs. 37.1%, p = 0.01). VT-free survival at 12 months was higher in the DEMAP group (88.03%) than in the non-DEMAP group (58.10%, p = 0.04). Trends also favored DEMAP in reducing cardiovascular hospitalization (10.55% vs. 24.70%) and mortality, though not statistically significant. Overall procedure time was similar mainly driven by less time during ablation and a lower mean ablated area in the focused DEMAP group compared to the non-DEMAP group.
conclusionThe focused DEMAP, a focused double extrastimulus mapping strategy, enhances VT substrate identification and is associated with improved VT-free survival without prolonging procedure time. This approach may refine substrate-based ablation and optimize lesion targeting without increasing procedural burden.
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.