ReviewJournal of arrhythmia2026
Imaging-Guided Versus Conventional Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of arrhythmia, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advanced cardiac imaging can characterize infarct substrate and guide ablation strategy and lesion delivery during ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation, but its incremental benefit over conventional strategies in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) remains uncertain. We compared imaging-guided with conventional VT ablation in adults with ICM. This PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261399180). MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Scopus were searched from January 1, 2016, through May 21, 2026, with citation tracking. Comparative analyses were restricted to ICM populations or extractable ICM subgroups. The primary outcome was VT recurrence, pooled using random-effects risk ratios (RRs); single-arm imaging-guided cohorts were summarized descriptively. Four comparative studies included 316 patients, of whom 134 underwent imaging-guided ablation and 182 underwent conventional ablation. Imaging-guided ablation was associated with lower VT recurrence (pooled RR 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.36-0.79;
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.