ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Efficacy and safety of electrical cardioversion and catheter ablation during pregnancy: a case review and literature analysis.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite guideline recommendations, electrical cardioversion and catheter ablation remain underutilized for the management of pregnancy-associated arrhythmias, primarily due to persistent but unfounded safety concerns. However, delayed rhythm control may precipitate hemodynamic compromise, increasing risks of maternal cardiovascular instability and fetal distress. Herein, we report an illustrative case from our institution and provide a structured narrative review of electrical cardioversion and catheter ablation during pregnancy. Methods: We present a case of recurrent arrhythmia in pregnancy that was refractory to standard therapies. The patient failed to respond to both radiofrequency ablation and electrical cardioversion. A search of Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed identified relevant studies using the terms pregnancy, electrical cardioversion, and catheter ablation. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) appraisal tools. The primary efficacy endpoint was successful restoration of sinus rhythm, while the safety endpoint focused on maternal-fetal adverse events. Results: A systematic review identified 19 studies (58 patients) reporting electrical cardioversion and 44 studies (159 patients) reporting catheter ablation during pregnancy, with success rates of 89.7% and 97.5%, respectively. Among pregnant women undergoing electrical cardioversion, there were 5 cases of preterm delivery and 2 cases of maternal-fetal mortality. The catheter ablation group had 2 cases of preterm delivery with no maternal-fetal mortality. Among different arrhythmia types, atrial fibrillation was the most common in the cardioversion group, while AVNRT predominated in the catheter ablation cohort. Conclusion: Both electrical cardioversion and catheter ablation are safe and effective treatment options during pregnancy. The available clinical evidence, though largely from case reports, consistently supports their use in this patient population.
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.