ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Comparison of general anesthesia and deep sedation for complex atrial ablation procedures using a lattice-tip catheter with monopolar pulsed field and radiofrequency ablation.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA dual-energy lattice-tip catheter with full 3D integration using monopolar pulsed field ablation (PFA) can result in significant skeletal muscle recruitment. It has therefore mainly been utilized under general anesthesia (GA), but procedures might also be possible using propofol-based deep sedation (DS).
methodsConsecutive patients undergoing ablation of atrial fibrillation or left atrial flutter using the lattice-tip catheter were enrolled. The use of PFA and/or RFA was based on anatomical location. Procedural characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients with GA and those with DS.
resultsA total of 101 patients underwent ablation, 54% were treated under GA and 47% received DS (median age 69 years, 40% women, 85% redo-procedures). The arrhythmia subtypes were atrial fibrillation in 26%, left atrial flutter in 44%, and both in 31%. In addition to PVI, a total of 150 left atrial extra-PV lesion sets were performed, and CTI ablation in 59 patients. Median laboratory occupancy time was significantly shorter in the deep sedation group (GA 203 min [157-231] vs. DS 162 min [IQR 148-196], p = 0.003). No conversions from deep sedation to general anesthesia were required. Freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence was higher in the GA group (76% vs. 49% in the DS group, p = 0.038). After adjustment for confounders, the association attenuated but remained directionally consistent in favor of GA (HR 0.47 for recurrence, p = 0.061).
conclusionsComplex atrial ablation using a dual-energy lattice-tip catheter appears safe under both GA and DS. Despite higher baseline risk, GA patients had fewer arrhythmia recurrences at one year.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42412155What 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.