ArticlePacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE2026
Zero-Fluoroscopy Versus Conventional Catheter Ablation for Premature Ventricular Contractions.
Article in Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCatheter ablation of premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) is an effective treatment modality, but traditionally involves fluoroscopy, which poses radiation risks. Recently, zero-fluoroscopy (ZF) techniques have emerged as a safer alternative, especially in young patients and those requiring multiple procedures.
methodsThis retrospective, single-center study evaluated 150 patients who underwent PVC ablation between January 2023 and March 2025. Patients were divided into two groups: those treated with ZF (n = 75) and conventional fluoroscopy (CF) (n = 75). Procedural characteristics, procedure time, success rates, and complications were compared.
resultsAcute procedural success was achieved in 79.3% overall, with comparable rates between ZF and CF groups (78.7% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.84). The median procedure time was similar (88 vs. 90 min, p = 0.14), and no significant differences were observed in complication rates (4.0% vs. 4.0%, p = 1.00). Stratified analysis revealed longer procedure times in anatomically complex PVC origins, particularly in LV-superior and summit regions (p < 0.001), whereas RV-inferior PVCs showed the highest success (90%) and shortest duration (p < 0.05). Univariate logistic regression identified a higher PVC burden and a longer procedure time as predictors of procedural failure. No coronary or atrioventricular conduction injury occurred in either group.
conclusionZero-fluoroscopy PVC ablation is a safe and effective alternative to conventional methods. Despite longer durations in anatomically complex cases, the ZF approach avoids radiation without compromising outcomes.
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.