ReviewEuropean cardiology2026
Bidirectional Block Assessment Techniques During Cavotricuspid Isthmus Ablation: A Comprehensive Review.
Review in European cardiology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ablation of common atrial flutter is one of the most commonly performed procedures in arrhythmia units worldwide. The most frequently used approach involves creating a radiofrequency ablation line between the tricuspid annulus and the inferior vena cava, at the level of the medial cavotricuspid isthmus. The generally accepted endpoint for this procedure is establishment of bidirectional block along this line. Since the late 1990s, various approaches have been used to confirm the presence of this block. However, most of the techniques discussed here have not been compared in large-scale studies. Instead, they are supported by small studies in a limited number of patients, making it difficult to assess the superiority of one technique over another. In addition, long-term follow-up data and recurrence rates are scarce. This comprehensive review presents an overview of the different techniques: we summarise the methodology, appropriate measurement procedures, degree of validity and potential pitfalls encountered in routine clinical practice. The accumulation of favourable results using a combination of different approaches increases the likelihood that the ablation line is electrically impermeable. Thus, we recommend familiarising oneself with all these methods and using multiple techniques to assess cavotricuspid isthmus ablation.
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.