ReviewPacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE2026
Double-Balloon Versus Selective Vein of Marshall Ethanol Infusion for Mitral Isthmus Block in Atrial Fibrillation.
Review 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAchieving durable mitral isthmus (MI) block remains challenging in persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF). Vein of Marshall ethanol infusion (VOMEI) facilitates MI block, but the impact of ethanol delivery technique on lesion formation and procedural outcomes is not well established.
methodsIn this prospective, single-center study, 106 patients with PeAF were assigned to three groups: RF-only (n = 57), selective VOMEI (n = 34), and double-balloon VOMEI (n = 15). Electroanatomic mapping was performed before and after ethanol infusion. The primary procedural endpoint was acute bidirectional MI block. Secondary endpoints included ethanol volume, scar area, voltage reduction, need for adjunctive radiofrequency (RF) ablation, arrhythmia recurrence, and procedural safety.
resultsThe primary procedural endpoint, acute bidirectional MI block, was achieved in both VOMEI groups; however, the double-balloon technique delivered significantly higher ethanol volumes and produced larger bipolar and unipolar scar areas with greater voltage reduction compared with selective cannulation (all p < 0.05). It also significantly reduced the need for endocardial and epicardial RF ablation (endocardial RF need: 24.4% vs. 75.6%, p = 0.032; epicardial RF need: 3.4% vs. 96.6%, p < 0.001). Although arrhythmia recurrence rates were lower in the double-balloon group, the differences were not statistically significant (AF recurrence: 0% vs. 8.8% in the selective VOMEI group; p = 0.347). No significant procedural complications were observed.
conclusionsDouble-balloon VOMEI enhances substrate modification and achieves MI block with less adjunctive RF ablation than selective cannulation in PeAF ablation. Optimizing ethanol delivery at the VOM ostium may improve procedural effectiveness. Larger randomized studies are needed to confirm long-term clinical benefits and refine patient selection. CLINICAL
trial registrationThis study was not registered in a clinical trials registry, as it was designed as a prospective single-center observational procedural study rather than an interventional clinical trial.
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.