ArticleEuropean heart journal open2026
Catheter Ablation of atrial fibrillation vs. atrioventricular nodal ablation with Conduction system pacing in persistent atrial fibrillation and heart failure (ABACUS): rationale and design.
Article in European heart journal open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiac implantable electronic devices in heart failure: needs, challenges, and real-world implementation.Heart failure reviews · 2026Review
- Conduction System Pacing With AV Node Ablation Versus Pulmonary Vein Isolation: Emerging Evidence.JACC. Asia · 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) have compromised clinical outcomes. Contemporary management includes rhythm control with AF ablation, or rate control and regularization with conduction system pacing and atrioventricular nodal ablation (CSP + AVNA). These strategies have never been compared in a randomized clinical trial. The study aims to determine whether CSP + AVNA is superior to AF ablation for reducing all-cause mortality and cardiovascular hospitalization, and noninferior with respect to all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization. Methods and results: ABACUS is a multicentre, investigator-initiated, randomized controlled trial enrolling 220 patients with persistent AF and HF, aged >60 years, who are eligible for both treatment modalities, with at most one previous AF ablation procedure. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to either catheter ablation of AF (with pulmonary vein isolation using any routine technique) or to CSP + AVNA. All patients will undergo at least one year of follow-up. The co-primary endpoints will be tested sequentially. A number of predefined secondary endpoints, including costs, will also be evaluated. Discussion: ABACUS compares CSP + AVNA with AF ablation in patients with persistent AF and HF. The results will provide evidence to improve care in this vulnerable patient population.
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.