ArticleJAMA network open2026
Global and Domain-Specific Cognitive Outcomes After Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation.
Article in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Error in Author Name.JAMA network open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with cognitive impairment, but the cognitive effects of catheter ablation (CA) using contemporary techniques remain uncertain. Objective: To evaluate changes in global and domain-specific cognitive function after CA for AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing CA for AF and a nonablation AF control group at a tertiary university hospital in Greece between January 2022 and June 2024. Cognitive assessments were performed at baseline and at 6-month follow-up. Exposures: CA using cryoballoon or pulsed field ablation (PFA). Main Outcomes and Measures: Changes from baseline to 6 months in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores and the novel REMEDES for Alzheimer (R4Alz) total and subdomain scores. Brain magnetic resonance imaging was performed before and within 48 hours after ablation to detect new cerebral infarcts. Results: Among 75 patients (40 [53.3%] female) undergoing ablation (mean [SD] age, 61.9 [10.4] years; 54 cryoballoon, 21 PFA) and 40 in a nonablation control group (26 [65.0%] female; mean [SD] age,61.4 [9.2] years), baseline cognitive scores were similar between groups. No new cerebral infarcts were detected after ablation. At 6 months, MoCA scores in the ablation group did not change significantly (mean change, 0.27; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.62), whereas R4Alz total scores increased (mean change, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.55 to 4.07), mainly associated with gains in short-term working memory and perceptual inhibition. No significant changes were observed in the control group. Compared with the control group, the ablation cohort demonstrated significantly greater improvements in both MoCA (mean difference in change, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.17 to 1.31; P = .01) and R4Alz total score (mean difference in change score, 3.18; 95% CI, 0.87 to 5.49; P = .007). In adjusted analyses accounting for baseline cognitive score and clinical covariates, ablation was independently associated with higher follow-up MoCA (β = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.31 to 1.44) and R4Alz scores (β = 3.80; 95% CI, 1.70 to 5.90). Conclusions and Relevance: In this prospective observational cohort study of 75 patients undergoing CA for AF, ablation was not associated with cognitive decline and was instead associated with modest short-term improvements in selected cognitive domains. Domain-specific assessment detected changes not captured by global cognitive screening, suggesting that modern ablation techniques may be associated with early subtle cognitive gains.
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.