ArticleAnnals of pediatric cardiology
Efficacy of catheter ablation for arrhythmia in adults with congenital heart disease: A meta-analysis of clinical outcomes.
Article in Annals of pediatric cardiology. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Arrhythmias remain a major clinical challenge in adult congenital heart disease (aCHD), contributing significantly to increased hospitalization rates and cardiac complications, affecting over 50% of aCHD patients. Catheter ablation (CA) is regarded as a first-line therapeutic modality due to its potential for disease modification. However, concerns persist regarding its long-term efficacy and safety. Thus, a comprehensive evaluation of CA outcomes in this population is warranted. Methods: The outcomes of interest were the success rate, secondary ablation rate, complication rates, and recurrence of arrhythmias. Quality assessment was done using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool, and meta-analysis was performed using RStudio. Results: A comprehensive search of seven databases yielded 15 articles for analysis, among which 10 were categorized as low-risk, four as moderate-risk, and one lacked information regarding bias. The single-arm meta-analysis, examining events per 100 observations, revealed a success rate of 85.37 (95% confidence interval [CI] =78.50, 92.24). Moreover, the secondary ablation rate was determined to be 29.29 (95% CI = 16.92, 41.66), while major complications occurred at a rate of 2.81 (95% CI = 0.89, 4.73) and minor complications at a rate of 5.29 (95% CI = 1.88, 8.70). The overall recurrence rate of arrhythmias was found to be 40.33 (95% CI = 28.37, 52.29), with specific rates for intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia at 20.33 (95% CI = 11.24, 29.43), atrial fibrillation at 14.25 (95% CI = 3.46, 25.05), and atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia at 9.70 (95% CI = 0.00, 19.56). Lastly, the implantation rate of implantable cardioverter defibrilators (ICDs) was found to be 1.05 (95% CI = 0.12, 1.99). Conclusion: CA for arrhythmias in aCHD patients demonstrates high success rates with minimal procedural complications. However, the substantial recurrence rates highlight the need for ongoing monitoring and proactive strategies to optimize long-term outcomes.
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.