Size matters in atrial fibrillation: the underestimated importance of reduction of contiguous electrical mass underlying the effectiveness of catheter ablation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence has accumulated over the last century of the importance of a critical electrical mass in sustaining atrial fibrillation (AF). AF ablation certainly reduces electrically contiguous atrial mass, but this is not widely accepted to be an important part of its mechanism of action. In this article, we review data showing that atrial size is correlated in many settings with AF propensity. Larger mammals are more likely to exhibit AF. This is seen both in the natural world and in animal models, where it is much easier to create a goat model than a mouse model of AF, for example. This also extends to humans-athletes, taller people, and obese individuals all have large atria and are more likely to exhibit AF. Within an individual, risk factors such as hypertension, valvular disease and ischaemia can enlarge the atrium and increase the risk of AF. With respect to AF ablation, we explore how variations in ablation strategy and the relative effectiveness of these strategies may suggest that a reduction in electrical atrial mass is an important mechanism of action. We counter this with examples in which there is no doubt that mass reduction is less important than competing theories such as ganglionated plexus ablation. We conclude that, when considering future strategies for the ablative therapy of AF, it is important not to discount the possibility that contiguous electrical mass reduction is the most important mechanism despite the disappointing consequence being that enhancing success rates in AF ablation may involve greater tissue destruction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".