Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 332

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Substrate modification combined with pulmonary vein isolation improves outcome of catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized comparison

Willems, S., Klemm, H., Rostock, T., Brandstrup, B., Ventura, R., Steven, D., Risius, T., Lutomsky, B., Meinertz, T.·2006·European Heart Journal

Abstract

AIMS: To investigate the effectiveness of additional substrate modification (SM) by left atrial (LA) linear lesions as compared with pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) in a prospective randomized study. Percutaneous PVI has evolved as an accepted treatment for paroxysmal AF but seemed to be less effective in patients with persistent AF. The benefit of PVI alone and additional linear lesions has not been validated in a randomized study so far. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-two patients with persistent AF (median duration 7, range 1-18 months) were randomly assigned to either PVI alone (n = 30) or additional SM (n =32) consisting of a roof line connecting both left superior and right superior PV and LA isthmus ablation between left inferior PV and mitral annulus. Procedures including SM were performed using a three-dimensional mapping system (EnSite NavX, St Jude Medical, St Paul, MN, USA). Anti-arrhythmic drugs were discontinued within 8 weeks after ablation in both groups. Follow-up included daily trans-telephonic ECG transmitted irrespective of the patient's symptoms. PVI was successful in 98% of all targeted veins in both groups. Additional SM did not increase fluoroscopy time (72.1+/-18.7 vs. 72.9+/-17.3 min, P=0.92) because of the use of three-dimensional navigation in the PVI+SM group. AF recurrences within the first 4 weeks following ablation were more common after PVI alone (77%) than additional SM (44%, P=0.002). After a follow-up time of 487 (429-570) days, only 20% of patients undergoing stand alone PVI remained in sinus rhythm when compared with 69% following PVI combined with SM (P=0.0001). Two patients assigned to PVI+SM experienced procedure-related complications (cardiac tamponade and minor stroke) which resolved without sequelae. CONCLUSION: PVI alone is insufficient in the treatment of persistent AF. However, additional left linear lesions increase the success rate significantly. Early AF-relapses are associated with a negative outcome after PVI alone but not following additional SM.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl093

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 34 references

Cited by

See all 332

Metadata

Authors
Willems, S., Klemm, H., Rostock, T., Brandstrup, B., Ventura, R., Steven, D., Risius, T., Lutomsky, B., & Meinertz, T.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2006-11-13
Volume
27
Issue
23
Pages
2871-2878
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2098977037
Cited by
332
References
34
FWCI
12.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Substrate modification combined with pulmonary vein isolation improves outcome of catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized comparison. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehl093
The paper
Willems, S., Klemm, H., Rostock, T., Brandstrup, B., Ventura, R., Steven, D., Risius, T., Lutomsky, B., & Meinertz, T. (2006). Substrate modification combined with pulmonary vein isolation improves outcome of catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized comparison. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehl093

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.