Long-term oral anticoagulation for patients after successful catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation is an effective rhythm-control therapy for selected patients. Currently, it is unknown whether maintenance of sinus rhythm after atrial fibrillation ablation can reduce one's stroke risk. If so, this may potentially obviate the need to treat patients with long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC). This article reviews the available evidence and areas of uncertainty pertaining to this question. RECENT FINDINGS: To date, no randomized trial data exist on this topic. Analyses from health administrative databases and observational registries suggested that atrial fibrillation patients who underwent catheter ablation had lower risk of stroke when compared with those who did not. Among patients who maintained sinus rhythm after ablation, low rates of stroke (<0.7% per year) were observed even after discontinuation of OAC therapy. These findings raise the possibility that successful catheter ablation may lower one's stroke risk to a point at which long-term OAC therapy is not obligatory. SUMMARY: Whether successful atrial fibrillation ablation reduces one's stroke risk is unknown. Low stroke risks were reported by observational studies in patients who maintained sinus rhythm after ablation despite OAC cessation. High-quality, randomized trial data are needed to provide clarity on this key unanswered question.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".