Evaluation of stroke incidence with duty‐cycled multielectrode‐phased radiofrequency ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation results of the VICTORY AF Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The VICTORY AF Study was designed to evaluate the risk of the procedure and/or device-related strokes in patients with PersAF on warfarin undergoing ablation with a phased radiofrequency (RF) system. METHODS: The VICTORY AF trial was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, investigational study. PersAF patients on vitamin K antagonism without major structural heart disease or history of stroke/transient ischemic attack undergoing phased RF ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of the procedure and/or device-related stroke within 30 days of the ablation by a board-certified neurologist's assessment. The secondary outcomes were an acute procedural success, 6 months effectiveness (defined as the reduction in AF/atrial flutter episodes lasting ≥10 minutes by 48-hour Holter 6 months postablation) and the number of patients with pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis. RESULTS: A total of 129 (108 PersAF, 21 long-standing PersAF) patients were treated (mean age: 60.6 ± 7.7; 79.8% male, 54.3% CHA2Ds2-VASc score ≥ 2). Two nondisabling strokes were reported (1.6%); one before discharge and the second diagnosed at the 30-day visit. Due to slow enrollment, the study was terminated before reaching the 95% one-sided upper confidence boundary for stroke incidence. Acute procedural success was 93.8%, and at 6 months, 72.8% of patients demonstrated ≥90% reduction in AF burden, 78.9% were off all antiarrhythmic drugs. There were no patients with PV stenosis of greater than 70%. CONCLUSIONS: VICTORY AF demonstrated a 1.6% incidence of stroke in PersAF undergoing ablation with a phased RF system which did not meet statistical confidence due to poor enrollment. The secondary outcomes suggest comparable efficacy to phased RF in the tailored treatment of permanent AF trial. Rigorous clinical evaluation of the stroke risk of new AF ablation technologies as well as restriction to Vitamin K antagonist anticoagulation appears to be unachievable goals in a clinical multicenter IDE trial of AF ablation in the current era.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".