Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 227

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

Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Medication for Treatment of Ventricular Premature Beats From the Right Ventricular Outflow Tract: Prospective Randomized Study

Ling, Zhiyu, Liu, Zengzhang, Su, Li, Zipunnikov, Vadim, Wu, Jinjin, Du, Huaan, Woo, Kamsang, Chen, Shaojie, Zhong, Bin, Lan, Xianbin, Fan, Jinqi, Xu, Yanping, Chen, Weijie, Yin, Yuehui, Nazarian, Saman, Zrenner, Bernhard·2014·Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology

Abstract

Background—: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) versus antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) for treatment of patients with frequent ventricular premature beats (VPBs) originating from the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT). Methods and Results—: A total of 330 eligible patients were included in the study and were randomly assigned to RFCA or AADs group. The absolute number and the burden of VPBs on 12-lead Holter monitors were measured at baseline and at 1st, 3rd, 6th, and 12th months after randomization. Left ventricular eject fraction was evaluated by transthoracic echocardiogram at baseline and at 3 and 6 months after randomization. During the 1-year follow-up period, VPB recurrence was significantly lower in patients randomized to RFCA group (32 patients, 19.4%) versus AADs group (146 patients, 88.6%; P <0.001, log-rank test). In a Poisson generalized estimating equations (GEE) regression model, RFCA was associated with a greater decrease in the burden of VPBs (incidence rate ratio 0.105; 95% confidence intervals [0.104–0.105]; P <0.001) compared with AADs. In a liner GEE model, the left ventricular eject fraction had a tendency to increase after the treatment in both groups (coefficient, 0.584; 95% confidence intervals [0.467–0.702]; P <0.001). In a Cox proportional model, the QS morphology in lead I was the only predictor of VPB recurrence free for catheter ablation (hazards ratio, 0.154; 95% confidence intervals [0.044–0.543]; P =0.004). Conclusions—: Catheter ablation is more efficacious than AADs for preventing VPB recurrence in patients with frequent VPBs originating from the RVOT. QS morphology in lead I was associated with better outcome after ablation.

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 · 10.1161/circep.113.000805

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

Cited by

See all 227

Metadata

Authors
Ling, Z., Liu, Z., Su, L., Zipunnikov, V., Wu, J., Du, H., Woo, K., Chen, S., Zhong, B., Lan, X., Fan, J., Xu, Y., Chen, W., Yin, Y., Nazarian, S., & Zrenner, B.
Venue
Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
Published
2014-04
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
237-243
ISSN
  • 1941-3084 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-3149
OpenAlex
W2102534011
Cited by
227
References
2
FWCI
11.16
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: Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Medication for Treatment of Ventricular Premature Beats From the Right Ventricular Outflow Tract: Prospective Randomized Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circep.113.000805
The paper
Ling, Z., Liu, Z., Su, L., Zipunnikov, V., Wu, J., Du, H., Woo, K., Chen, S., Zhong, B., Lan, X., Fan, J., Xu, Y., Chen, W., Yin, Y., Nazarian, S., & Zrenner, B. (2014). Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Medication for Treatment of Ventricular Premature Beats From the Right Ventricular Outflow Tract: Prospective Randomized Study. Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1161/circep.113.000805

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.