European prospective multicentre study of hybrid thoracoscopic and transcatheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation: the HISTORIC-AF trial†
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The HISTORIC-AF trial is a prospective, multicentre, single-arm study designed to evaluate the outcomes of a staged endoscopic and transcatheter ablation in patients with stand-alone, persistent or long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: From 2012 to 2015, 100 consecutive patients were enrolled and underwent thoracoscopic left atrial epicardial isolation ('box lesion') followed by transcatheter ablation in case of AF recurrency. The safety end point was the composite outcome of freedom from major adverse events at 30-days, while efficacy end points were: (i) primary: freedom from AF and stable sinus rhythm following isolated thoracospic ablation >60% and (ii) secondary: freedom from AF and stable sinus rhythm >80% following hybrid ablation (as per HRS criteria). RESULTS: No death occurred and surgical thoracoscopic procedure was successfully completed in all patients. Survival free from major adverse events at 30 days was 94%: there were 3 permanent pacemaker implants, 2 episodes of stroke and 1 revision for bleeding. At discharge, 87% of patients were in sinus rhythm. A staged transcatheter ablation was carried out in all patients with AF recurrences at the end of 3 months blanking period (17% of patients). At 12-months follow-up, a stable restoration of sinus rhythm was achieved in 75% and 88% of patients following isolated thoracoscopic ablation and hybrid ablation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The HISTORIC-AF trial showed that thoracoscopic isolated surgical ablation reached both the safety and the efficacy end points. Hybrid ablation steadily improved rhythm outcomes and may be considered in the future as the treatment of choice for patients with persistent and long-standing persistent AF. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01622907.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".