Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 381

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Freedom From Atrial Tachyarrhythmias After Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Comparison Between 2 Current Ablation Strategies

Open access
Karch, Martin R., Zrenner, Bernhard, Deisenhofer, Isabel, Schreieck, Jürgen, Ndrepepa, Gjin, Dong, Jun, Lamprecht, Katrin, Barthel, Petra, Luciani, Etienne, Schömig, Albert, Schmitt, Claus·2005·Circulation

Abstract

Background— Data on the comparative value of the circumferential pulmonary vein and the segmental pulmonary vein ablation for interventional treatment of atrial fibrillation are limited. We hypothesized that the circumferential pulmonary vein ablation approach was superior to the segmental pulmonary vein ablation approach. Methods and Results— One hundred patients with highly symptomatic atrial fibrillation were randomly assigned to undergo either circumferential (n=50) or segmental pulmonary vein ablation (n=50). Freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias in a 7-day Holter monitoring at 6 months was the primary end point. Secondary end points were freedom of arrhythmia-related symptoms and a composite of pericardial tamponade, thromboembolic complications, and pulmonary vein stenosis (safety end point). On the basis of the results of the 7-day Holter monitoring at 6 months, 21 patients (42%) after circumferential pulmonary vein ablation and 33 patients (66%) after segmental pulmonary vein ablation ( P =0.02) were free of atrial tachyarrhythmia episodes. During the 6-month follow-up period, 27 patients (54%) after circumferential pulmonary vein ablation and 41 patients (82%) after segmental pulmonary vein ablation remained free of arrhythmia-related symptoms ( P <0.01). No significant difference was found in the safety end point (6 versus 7 events; P =0.77) in the circumferential versus segmental pulmonary vein ablation group, respectively. Conclusions— This study demonstrates no superiority of the circumferential pulmonary vein ablation over segmental pulmonary vein ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation in terms of efficacy and safety.

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/circulationaha.104.491530

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 381

Metadata

Authors
Karch, M. R., Zrenner, B., Deisenhofer, I., Schreieck, J., Ndrepepa, G., Dong, J., Lamprecht, K., Barthel, P., Luciani, E., Schömig, A., & Schmitt, C.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2005-06-07
Volume
111
Issue
22
Pages
2875-2880
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2148188644
Cited by
381
References
1
FWCI
31.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Freedom From Atrial Tachyarrhythmias After Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Comparison Between 2 Current Ablation Strategies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.104.491530
The paper
Karch, M. R., Zrenner, B., Deisenhofer, I., Schreieck, J., Ndrepepa, G., Dong, J., Lamprecht, K., Barthel, P., Luciani, E., Schömig, A., & Schmitt, C. (2005). Freedom From Atrial Tachyarrhythmias After Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Comparison Between 2 Current Ablation Strategies. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.104.491530

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.