Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 374

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The 1998 NASPE Prospective Catheter Ablation Registry

SCHEINMAN, MELVIN M., HUANG, SUE·2000·Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology

Abstract

The results of the NASPE Prospective Voluntary Registry are reported. A total of 3,357 patients were entered. For those undergoing atrioventricular (AV) junctional ablation (646 patients), the success rate was 97.4% and significant complications occurred in 5 patients. A total of 1,197 patients underwent AV nodal modification for AV nodal reentrant tachycardia, which was successful in 96.1% and the only significant complication was development of AV block (1 %). Accessory pathway ablation was performed in 654 patients and was successful in 94%. Major complications included cardiac tamponade (7 patients), acute myocardial infarction (1 patient), femoral artery pseudoaneurysm (1 patient), AV block (1 patient), pneumothorax (1 patient), and pericarditis (2 patients). A total of 447 patients underwent atrial flutter ablation and acute success was achieved in 86% of patients. Significant complications included inadvertent AV block (3 patients), significant tricuspid regurgitation (1 patient), cardiac tamponade (1 patient), and pneumothorax (1 patient). Atrial tachycardia was attempted for 216 patients and the success rate was higher for those with right atrial (80%) or left atrial (72%) compared to those with septal foci (52%). A total of 201 patients underwent ablation for ventricular tachycardia. The success rate was higher for those with idiopathic ventricular tachycardia compared to those with ventricular tachycardia due to ischemic heart disease or car‐diomyopathy. While the number of AV junction ablation were higher for those > 60 years of age, there was no significant difference in the success rate or incidence of complication comparing patients ≥ 60 to those < 60 years of age. In addition, we found no differences in incidence of success or complications comparing large volume centers (> 100 ablation/year) with lower volume centers or between teaching and non‐teaching hospitals.

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 · 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2000.tb00891.x

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 374

Metadata

Authors
SCHEINMAN, M. M., & HUANG, S.
Venue
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-06
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
1020-1028
ISSN
  • 0147-8389 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-8159
OpenAlex
W2054318665
Cited by
374
References
2
FWCI
10.11
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: The 1998 NASPE Prospective Catheter Ablation Registry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-8159.2000.tb00891.x
The paper
SCHEINMAN, M. M., & HUANG, S. (2000). The 1998 NASPE Prospective Catheter Ablation Registry. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.2000.tb00891.x

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.