ArticleScientific reports2025
Very early cardiac hemodynamic changes after atrial fibrillation ablation.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Development and validation of a LightGBM-based model with risk stratification for predicting early recurrence after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
All chambers' systolic functions were improved with long-term follow-up after catheter ablation (CA). However, changes on cardiac function on very early phase (within 48 h) has not been thoroughly investigated. This study aimed to evaluate the acute effects of CA on cardiac function and morphology immediately post-procedural (≤ 48 h). We prospectively enrolled 117 consecutive patients. Hemodynamic parameters including biatrial pressure and echocardiographic data were acquired pre- and post-ablation. (i) All bi-atrial pressures significantly elevated post-ablation (p < 0.002). (ii) Bi-atrial function including ejection fraction, reservoir strain and conduit strain improved immediately after ablation (p < 0.01). Persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) improved more than paroxysmal AF. (iii) Biventricular systolic function improved early but left ventricular diastolic function was stunned within 48 h (p < 0.01). Whereas all chambers' volume did not change significantly (p > 0.05). (iv) No statistically significant differences in pre- versus post-procedural pressure changed between patients with persistent AF and those with paroxysmal AF in biatrial pressure elevation (p > 0.05). (v) Echocardiographic parameters including LA reservoir strain, RA reservoir strain, peak A of mitral valve, peak E of tricuspid valve and inferior vena cava diameters increased more in persistent AF groups (p < 0.05). This prospective study suggested all chambers' systolic functions improved in early period post-ablation with left ventricular diastolic function stunning. Mechanical improvements preceding structural remodeling in AF patients early after ablation.
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.