Efficacy and Risk of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Before 45 Years of Age
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Young patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) tend to be more symptomatic and less willing to take long-term medications, yet catheter ablation remains recommended as second-line therapy for AF regardless of age. This study seeks to characterize the effectiveness and risk of AF ablation in the young. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive (n=1548) patients who underwent 2038 AF ablation procedures were included. Major procedural complications and efficacy were analyzed on the basis of age at the initial procedure: <45 years (group 1), 45 to 54 years (group 2), 55 to 64 years (group 3), and ≥65 years (group 4). AF control was defined as no or rare AF on or off antiarrhythmic drugs. The primary outcome of AF control was similar in all groups; it was achieved in 87% in group 1, 88% in group 2, 88% in group 3, and 82% in group 4 (P=0.06). However, more group 1 patients demonstrated freedom from AF off antiarrhythmic drugs (76%) compared with group 2 at 68%, group 3 at 65%, and group 4 at 53% (P<0.001). There were no major complications in group 1, 10 (1.7%) in group 2, 14 (1.4%) in group 3, and 10 (2.6%) in group 4 (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients younger than 45 years, there is a lower major complication rate and a comparable efficacy rate, with a greater chance of being AF free without antiarrhythmic drugs. These findings suggest that it may be appropriate to consider ablative therapy as first-line therapy in this age group.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 it