ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2025
Effectiveness and safety of different types of ablation modalities in patients with atrial fibrillation: a bayesian network meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Machine learning-driven exploration of therapeutic targets for atrial fibrillation-joint analysis of single-cell and bulk transcriptomes and experimental validation.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia, which significantly contributes to morbidity, mortality, and a diminished quality of life. Despite advancements in pharmacological treatments, many AF patients do not achieve adequate symptom control with oral medications. This network meta-analysis seeks to provide comprehensive evidence to guide clinical decision-making and optimize ablation strategies for patients with atrial fibrillation.
methodsThis network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted in accordance to PRISMA NMA Checklist of Items (PROSPERO No. CRD42024577782). A comprehensive search was performed across major literature databases (PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL, ProQuest, and Web of Science) up to July 10, 2024. Data analyses were performed using Rstudio v.4.4.1 employing Bayesian NMA with random-effects models. Sensitivity, subgroup, and network meta-regression analyses were also conducted. SUCRA values were estimated to present the ranking of each treatment in the network. Meta-proportions with GLMM (Generalized Linear Mixed Model) also performed to analyze the safety outcomes.
resultsA total of 6332 AF patients from 46 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. NMA demonstrate epicardial (surgical) approach, especially video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) (OR 1.54; 95%CrI [1.03,2.38]; SUCRA 89.61) exhibited superiority to reduce the AF recurrence in AF patients. Hybrid epicardial-endocardial ablation (OR 1.51; 95% CrI [0.82,2.82]; SUCRA 85.7) had a similar freedom from AF rate to VATS. Subgroup and network meta-regression analysis revealed that AF type ((β -0.415; [-0.776;-0.042]) and AF duration (β 0.602; [0.066;1.079]) influence the freedom from AF rate. Meta-proportion indicated that surgical or hybrid ablation exhibited a higher risk of mortality (Prop = 5.07%), pericardial effusion (Prop = 4.35%), and phrenic nerve injury (Prop = 4.35%).
conclusionNMA demonstrated higher effectiveness of VATS and hybrid ablation in reducing the recurrence rate of AF. Despite complications associated with surgical and hybrid approaches have higher prevalence, type of complications encountered in this approaches are less diverse.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.