ArticleEuropean heart journal open2026
Impact of left ventricular ejection fraction on clinical outcomes following ventricular tachycardia ablation: a propensity-matched analysis from a large multicentre database.
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. 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
Aims: Ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation is an established therapy for patients with structural heart disease and recurrent VT. However, the impact of left ventricular function on peri-procedural and long-term outcomes remains incompletely understood. We evaluated the association of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on clinical outcomes after VT ablation. Methods and results: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX Research Network (2010-21) to evaluate outcomes after VT ablation, stratifying patients by LVEF (>30 vs. ≤30%). Propensity score matching (1:1) was used to balance baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was a 30-day composite safety endpoint defined as all-cause mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use, or cardiac tamponade. Secondary outcomes included 3-year all-cause mortality, ventricular arrhythmia recurrence, and rehospitalization. The individual components of the 30-day composite were evaluated in exploratory analyses. Among 2549 patients who underwent VT ablation, 623 were matched in each subgroup. The 30-day composite safety endpoint was significantly lower in patients with LVEF >30% (17.9 vs. 26.3%; Conclusion: In this large real-world study, patients with LVEF >30% undergoing VT ablation experienced significantly better peri-procedural and long-term 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.