A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Validation Strategy for Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation in Long-Term Maintaining Sinus Rhythm: A Randomized Controlled Study. | LitMetric

Data comparing the outcomes of loose versus rigorous validation strategies for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) are limited. We aimed to prospectively assess the effectiveness of loose versus rigorous validation for PVI in patients with PAF with a maintained sinus rhythm. Patients ( = 117) with PAF were randomized to receive either loose validation ( = 59) or rigorous validation ( = 58) after PVI. The presence of dormant conduction in loose validation was assessed only by adenosine administration followed by isoproterenol infusion. The complete absence of pulmonary vein (PV) potentials in rigorous validation was confirmed by the combination of the Lasso catheter with isoproterenol plus adenosine. Dormant conduction, revealed by validation after PVI, was ablated until all reconnections were eliminated. The procedure time in the rigorous validation group was greater than that in the loose validation group (161.3 ± 52.7 min vs. 142.5 ± 37.6 min, =0.03, respectively). After successful PVI, the detection of dormant PV reconnections in the rigorous validation group was significantly greater than that in the loose validation group (69.0% vs. 37.3%, =0.001). However, after reisolation of the sites of dormant PV conduction, the postablation recurrence rates in 1.3 years were similar between the groups (79.2% vs. 83.6%, =0.67). Rigorous validation can reveal dormant conduction in more than two-thirds of patients with PAF undergoing PVI. However, rigorous validation and additional ablation of the resulting connections do not improve long-term outcomes when a protocol that includes electrophysiological confirmation and pharmacological validation is used.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11496574PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/3672210DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rigorous validation
32
loose validation
16
dormant conduction
16
validation group
16
validation
15
pulmonary vein
12
vein isolation
8
patients paroxysmal
8
paroxysmal atrial
8
atrial fibrillation
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!