Cited by 70Cardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias

Outcomes after radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial tachycardia

Anguera, Ignasi, Brugada, Josep, Roba, Michel, Mont, Lluı́s, Aguinaga, Luis, Geelen, Peter, Brugada, Pedro·2001·The American Journal of Cardiology

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and clinical benefit of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) in a large series of patients with atrial tachycardia (AT). The determinants of success or failure of RFCA in AT remain unclear. We evaluated the results of radiofrequency ablation in 73 women and 32 men (mean age 48 +/- 19 years) with AT. Mapping techniques were based on identification of the earliest endocardial atrial electrogram recorded during AT. AT originated from the right atrium in 91 patients and from the left atrium in 14. The cardiac ventricles were dilated in 12 patients. AT ablation was successful in 80 patients (77%) regardless of the site of origin. Age, gender, rate of tachycardia, temperature achieved during application, or presence of tachycardiomyopathy were not significant determinants of acute success by univariate analysis. There was a significantly higher acute success rate of ablation in patients with paroxysmal (88%, 45 of 51) and permanent (71%, 30 of 42) forms than in patients with repetitive forms of AT (41%, 5 of 12) (p <0.005). The mean local endocardial electrogram time (relative-to-surface P-wave onset) was -47 +/- 17 ms at successful ablation sites and -29 +/- 21 ms at unsuccessful sites (p <0.03). Ablation was unsuccessful in 25 cases. Thus, RFCA of AT can be performed with a high acute success rate. Patients with repetitive forms and those with multifocal origin had a lower acute success rate. The highest incidence of recurrences was found in anterior right atrial foci.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0002-9149(00)01531-9

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anguera, I., Brugada, J., Roba, M., Mont, L., Aguinaga, L., Geelen, P., & Brugada, P.
Affiliations
  • Onze Lieve Vrouwziekenhuis Hospital (BE)
  • Hospital Clínic de Barcelona (ES)
Venue
The American Journal of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-04
Volume
87
Issue
7
Pages
886-890
ISSN
0002-9149 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2134050519
Cited by
70
References
20
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The American Journal of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Keywords
atrial tachycardia, radiofrequency catheter ablation, ablation success rate, paroxysmal atrial tachycardia, atrial tachycardia recurrence, atrial electrograms, tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy, atrial fibrillation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Electrocardiography, Electrophysiology, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Tachycardia, Ectopic Atrial, Treatment Outcome, Catheter Ablation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review