ReviewIndian pacing and electrophysiology journal
Pulmonary Vein Isolation: Comparing different energy sources - independent or complementary use?
Review in Indian pacing and electrophysiology journal. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) has rapidly emerged as a non-thermal modality for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in the treatment of atrial fibrillation. By delivering high-voltage, microsecond-scale electrical pulses, PFA produces irreversible electroporation of cardiomyocytes while preserving the extracellular matrix of adjacent structures. Compared with conventional thermal modalities, namely radiofrequency (RF) and cryoablation, PFA offers shorter procedural times, comparable or superior efficacy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, and a markedly reduced risk of esophageal injury, persistent phrenic nerve palsy, and pulmonary vein stenosis, as demonstrated in numerous randomized controlled trials and large registries. However, PFA introduces unique limitations: hemolysis with potential renal injury, acute and delayed coronary vasospasm when ablating near the coronaries, the need for deep sedation or general anesthesia in most current systems, and uncertain durability of non-pulmonary vein lesions including the mitral and cavotricuspid isthmuses. Thermal ablation retains advantages for lesions beyond the pulmonary veins matter most particularly along the cavotricuspid and mitral isthmuses. Dual-energy catheters that combine RF and PFA, and sequential colocalized RF + PFA strategies, are now in clinical evaluation and may allow operators to create stacked lesions which may offer benefits for lesion durability. PFA is poised to become the dominant energy source for PVI, but in current clinical practice it is best viewed as complementary to, rather than fully replacing, thermal ablation.
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.