ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Biomarker response to balloon-in-basket pulsed field ablation: does posterior wall isolation matter?
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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.
- "Awake but elsewhere": impact of augmented reality glasses on conscious sedation in balloon-in-basket pulsed field ablation.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Does sex shape the biological footprint of balloon-in-basket pulsed field ablation-guided pulmonary vein isolation? A biomarker analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A novel balloon-in-basket pulsed field ablation (BiB-PFA) catheter enables efficient pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and allows posterior wall isolation (PWI) within the same procedure. The incremental biological effect of PWI compared to PVI alone remains uncertain, particularly regarding inflammation, myocardial injury, and hemolysis. Methods: In this prospective, single-center study, consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation underwent first-time BiB-PFA, either PVI only or PVI plus PWI. Venous blood samples were collected before and one day after ablation. Biomarkers included leukocytes, platelets, hemoglobin, C-reactive protein (CRP), haptoglobin, bilirubin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR), myoglobin, creatine kinase (CK), and troponin T. Results: A total of 60 patients were enrolled (PVI only Conclusion: BiB-PFA PVI provokes systemic responses involving inflammation, myocardial injury, and hemolysis. Adjunctive PWI increases application number but does not further increase biomarker release, supporting the biological safety of PWI.
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.