ArticleCJC open2026
Variability in Adoption of Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: An International Survey of Cardiac Surgeons.
Article in CJC open, 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
Background: Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) during cardiac surgery is a guideline-recommended procedure with demonstrated effectiveness in restoring sinus rhythm. Nonetheless, rates of utilization are relatively low, a situation that needs to be better understood. Methods: This study used an electronically distributed survey to characterize the use, techniques, and clinical indications for concomitant AF ablation among cardiac surgeons. Results: Of the 362 surveys distributed internationally, 79 responses were received (22%). After excluding 3 incomplete responses, 76 surveys were included in the final analysis. A majority of respondents (67 of 76; 88%) reported performing concomitant surgical ablation of AF. Among surgeons who perform AF ablation, practice variation was observed. Pulmonary vein isolation was the most common lesion set (45%), and over half of surgeons (52%) tailored lesion selection to AF type, favouring more extensive ablation for persistent AF. Regarding patient selection, notable deterrents to concomitant ablation included the following: increased left atrial size, more persistent forms of AF, severe left ventricular dysfunction, reoperation, minimally invasive surgeries, and complex cases with long pump times. Among non-ablating surgeons (9 of 76; 12%), common factors reported to help increase future adoption of AF ablation included stronger clinical evidence and more affordable and accessible equipment. Conclusions: Our findings reveal that surgical ablation of AF is performed by the majority of research-active cardiac surgeons, yet meaningful variation persists in how and when it is applied. These findings underscore the need for a well designed, definitive trial to guide future care and address the gap between recommendations and practice.
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.