ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Evaluation of ablation index-guided linear lesions formation for left atrial arrhythmia treatment.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2026. 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCatheter based left atrial linear lesion ablation is commonly performed in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and complex left atrial substrate or in patients presenting with macro-reentrant left atrial tachycardia (LAT).
aimsTo assess acute and long-term effectiveness, procedural viability and safety of ablation index (AI)-guided compared to contact force (CF)-guided ablation of left atrial linear lesions.
methodsConsecutive patients undergoing left atrial ablation for AF or LAT including left atrial linear lesions ablation either guided by AI or CF without AI were prospectively enrolled. Characteristics of anterior lines (AL), mitral isthmus lines (MIL), roof lines (RFL) and posterior wall isolation (PWI) were systematically analyzed in both cohorts. Procedural feasibility, safety, acute and long-term block of linear lesions as well as clinical outcome in terms of arrhythmia recurrence were assessed.
resultsA total of 313 patients were included. 260 patients (83.1%) underwent AI-guided ablation and 53 patients (16.9%) CF-guided ablation. Complete conduction block was comparable between study groups (94 vs. 95% for AL, 94 vs. 95% for AL100 vs. 99% for RFL and 100 vs. 100% for PWI). Acute block of MIL was significantly more often achieved in AI-guided ablation (100 vs. 67%, p = 0.0004). No significant difference in persistence of conduction block for AL (p = 0.47), MIL (p = 0.57), RFL (p = 0.18) or PWI (p = 1) could be observed between AI-guided or CF-guided ablation during repeat ablation. Survival analysis showed no significant differences in estimated arrhythmia free survival (p = 0.45). Periprocedural complications occurred in 22 patients (7%) with equal distribution in CF-guided and AI-guided ablation (p = 0.31).
conclusionAI-guided ablation is associated with significantly higher rates of acute conduction block across MIL, shorter RF times and lower FTI for AL and RFL while complication rates and long-term clinical outcome are comparable to non-AI-guided ablation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41670875What 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.