Cited by 109Cardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Radiofrequency catheter ablation versus medical therapy for initial treatment of supraventricular tachycardia and its impact on quality of life and healthcare costs

Bathina, MuraliN, Mickelsen, Steve, Brooks, Conni, Jaramillo, Joe, Hepton, Trish, Kusumoto, FredM·1998·The American Journal of Cardiology

Abstract

We prospectively compared the impact on quality of life and cost effectiveness between ablation and medication as an initial strategy for patients with paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). Seventy-nine consecutive patients with newly documented paroxysmal SVT were treated with either ablation or medication. Health surveys (SF-36 and disease-specific questions) were obtained at baseline and after 12 months of follow up. Cost of health care utilization for the 6 months before and after treatment were measured. Both medication and ablation improved quality of life. However, ablation improved quality of life in more general health categories than medication. At follow up, ablation was associated with significantly improved quality of life in the bodily pain (63+/-24 vs 81+/-20, p <0.005), general health (69+/-21 vs 79+/-21, p <0.05), vitality (55+/-21 vs 66+/-22, p <0.05), and role emotion (78+/-36 vs 94+/-17, p <0.05) categories when compared with medication. Although both medication and ablation decreased frequency of disease-specific symptoms, ablation resulted in complete amelioration of symptoms in more patients (33% vs 74%). Potential long-term costs were similar for medication and ablation. In conclusion, ablation improves health-related quality of life to a greater extent, and in more aspects of general and disease-specific health than medication.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00416-0

Cites

12 of 12 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
Bathina, M., Mickelsen, S., Brooks, C., Jaramillo, J., Hepton, T., & Kusumoto, F.
Affiliations
Lovelace Medical Center (US)
Venue
The American Journal of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-09
Volume
82
Issue
5
Pages
589-593
ISSN
0002-9149 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2053154502
Cited by
109
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.53
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
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia, radiofrequency catheter ablation, antiarrhythmic drugs, quality of life, cost-effectiveness, health care costs, SF-36, symptom burden, initial treatment strategy
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Aged, Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, New Mexico, Quality of Life, Tachycardia, Paroxysmal, Tachycardia, Supraventricular, Treatment Outcome, Health Care Costs, Patient Satisfaction, 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