ArticleEuropean heart journal open2026
'Ablate and pace' reduces mortality in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis.
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 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.
- Predictors of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in patients undergoing AV nodal ablation: insights from a Delphi process and retrospective cohort study.European heart journal open · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: We compared the effects of 'ablate and pace' to pharmacological therapy on mortality and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), with or without heart failure (HF). Methods and results: Articles were identified by searching PubMed, Central, and Embase until 30 June 2024. Inclusion criteria encompassed observational and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 'ablate and pace' with pharmacological therapy and investigating outcomes of mortality and LVEF in patients with AF. An exclusion criterion was lack of a parallel study design. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and the mean difference (MD) in LVEF. Endpoints were assessed through meta-analyses computing relative risks (RRs) and MDs. The clinical diagnosis of HF was used to distinguish between patients with and without HF. Initially, 3837 studies were identified, of which 24 ( Conclusion: 'Ablate and CRT' reduced mortality in HF patients as compared with pharmacological therapy, which was supported by statistical associations in observational studies. A single RCT corroborated the finding.
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.