ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Evaluation of the novel multi-points surface thermometry cryoballoon in the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) is extensively utilized to treat paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). The IceMagicTM Cardiac CryoAblation System (CryoMST, MicroPort EP MedTech CO., Ltd, Shanghai, China) has recently been introduced. Objectives: To evaluate the clinical efficiency and potential benefits of CryoMST in PAF. Methods: A propensity-score matched study compared 16 patients with PAF undergoing initial CBA with CryoMST against cohorts treated with Arctic Front Advance™ ( Results: The CryoMST cohort showed significant reductions in total procedure time [83.00 (Q1, Q3: 75.00, 89.25) vs. 102.00 (Q1, Q3: 85.00, 127.75) min], ablation time [20.00 (Q1, Q3: 18.74, 21.00) vs. 46.00 (Q1, Q3: 38.00, 55.75) min], fluoroscopy time [12.93 (Q1, Q3: 11.15, 16.96) vs. 17.85 (Q1, Q3: 12.35, 23.38) min], fluoroscopy dose [81.80 (Q1, Q3: 69.93, 96.03) vs. 200.00 (Q1, Q3: 134.75, 311.50) mGy], and contrast agent volume [16.00 (Q1, Q3: 11.00, 22.00) vs. 52.50 (Q1, Q3: 45.00, 57.00) mL] compared to the Arctic Front Advance™ group ( Conclusions: The CryoMST system demonstrates excellent diagnostic accuracy for pulmonary vein occlusion, obviating the need for routine venography. It significantly reduces procedure time, radiation exposure, and contrast use compared to conventional CBA, while maintaining comparable 12-month efficacy and safety to established ablation modalities for PAF.
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.