ArticleHeart and vessels2026
Prospective observational study of the effect of catheter ablation among patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and persistent atrial fibrillation: Findings from BENEFIT-HFpEF.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of atrial fibrillation on heart failure-related events after endovascular therapy for peripheral artery disease.Heart and vessels · 2026Article
- Author's Reply to "Microvascular angina beyond risk markers: the need for endotype-specific validation".Heart and vessels · 2026Article
- Microvascular angina beyond risk markers: the need for endotype-specific validation.Heart and vessels · 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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Catheter ablation (CA) is beneficial in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation (AF), but its role in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains unclear. The BENEFIT-HFpEF study prospectively evaluated CA in patients with HFpEF and persistent AF. This multicenter prospective study enrolled 55 patients with HFpEF (left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 45%, elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels, and structural heart disease) and persistent or long-standing persistent AF. All the patients underwent pulmonary vein isolation. The primary endpoint, change in peak VO₂ at 6 months, showed no significant improvement (median 15.9 to 15.9 mL/min/kg). However, secondary outcomes improved: NYHA class decreased, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire scores declined (median 13 to 6), VE/VCO₂ slope improved (median 35.2 to 31.7), and NT-proBNP levels dropped markedly (median 1354 to 281 pg/mL); nonetheless, 47.2% of patients still had NT-proBNP ≥ 300 pg/mL. Echocardiography showed left atrium reverse remodeling, with the left atrial volume index decreasing from a median of 44.1 to 27.6 mL/m²; 33% still had left atrial enlargement. Sinus rhythm was maintained in 94.3 and 96.0% at 6 and 12 months, respectively. No deaths or heart failure hospitalizations occurred during follow-up; AF recurrence rate was 20.0% at 12 months. In HFpEF with persistent AF, CA improved symptoms, cardiac structure, and natriuretic peptide levels. Signs of ongoing HFpEF pathology remain in many patients even after CA. Further randomized trials are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42228076What 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.