ArticleBiophysical journal2026
Ablation, percolation, and afterdepolarization.
Article in Biophysical journal, 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
Abstract
Ablation is an effective treatment for cardiac arrhythmias, and its primary goal is to remove excitability from cells to break pathological reentrant circuits or focal activities and thereby prevent recurrent arrhythmias. Ablation prevents excitation by destroying cells in targeted regions. However, if ablation does not eliminate sufficient cells, waves of action potentials (APs) may continue to propagate, and ablation may fail to suppress arrhythmias. In this study, we develop a theoretical approach that predicts the minimum number of ablated cells to break reentrant circuits and suppress the initiation and propagation of focal activities. Ablation creates a mixture of excitable and nonexcitable cells. As the fraction of excitable cells increases, the probability of AP wave propagation increases, since an AP can only propagate when an excitable cell excites another excitable cell. When this fraction exceeds the "percolation threshold," as defined in percolation theory, AP waves always propagate successfully, regardless of the size of the ablated area. Therefore, for reentrant arrhythmias, the fraction of excitable cells in the ablation area must be below the percolation threshold to block AP waves. For focal arrhythmias, delayed afterdepolarizations (DADs) can trigger premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) when DADs overcome the source-sink mismatch. Ablation of excitable cells also reduces the functional electrical sink, making it easier to initiate triggered activities. However, if the fraction of excitable cells in the ablation area is below the percolation threshold, triggered activities also cannot propagate. On the other hand, when the fraction of excitable cells is high, even though AP waves can propagate more easily, the initiation of PVCs becomes more difficult due to the source-sink mismatch. The propensity for PVCs reaches its maximum at the percolation threshold. These scenarios can also apply to other pathological conditions, such as myocardial ischemia and infarction, where excitable myocytes are interspersed with nonexcitable tissue.
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.