MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 15554: Three-Year Incidence of Pacemaker Implantation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Sinus Node Dysfunction Receiving Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drugs

2023· article· en· W4389953124 on OpenAlexaff
Nazli Okumus, Maximiliano Iglesias, Rahul Khanna, Yiran Rong, Saima Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsJohnson & Johnson (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationCohortInternal medicineCardiologyCatheter ablationIncidence (geometry)Cumulative incidenceProportional hazards modelConcomitantHazard ratioSurgeryConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Around one in five patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has a diagnosis of sinus node dysfunction (SND). Hypothesis: There will be lower incidence of pacemaker implantation (PPM) among patients with AF and SND who undergo catheter ablation (CA) compared to anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD). Methods: Data were collected from 2014-2022 utilizing Optum Clinformatics database, an administrative claims database for commercially insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries in the United States. Adult patients with concomitant AF and SND, and prior history of taking at least one AAD were identified and classified into CA or AAD cohort based for subsequent treatment. Patients were excluded if they had a prior history of PPM, implantable cardiac defibrillator, catheter or surgical ablation, AV nodal ablation, valvular procedure, left atrial appendage occlusion, or high grade/complete heart block. Inverse probability treatment weighting technique was applied to balance sociodemographic and clinical comorbid characteristics between the cohorts. Weighted Cox regression model was used to evaluate the differential risk of incident PPM. Sub-analyses were performed by AF type (paroxysmal and persistent AF). Results: There were 1,206 patients in AAD cohort and 1,624 patients in CA cohort. Incidence rate (per 1,000 person-year) of PPM was 55.8 (95% CI 47.1-64.5) for CA cohort and 117.8 (95% CI 101.7-133.9) for AAD cohort and the 3-year cumulative incidence of PPM was 23.1% (95% CI 20.0%-26.2%) and 13.8% (95% CI 11.6%-15.9%), respectively. Weighted Cox regression model indicated that CA had 43% lower risk of incident PPM compared to AADs (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; 95% CI 0.46-0.71). Those with paroxysmal AF (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.34-0.69) had lower need for PPM compared to persistent AF (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.40-0.81). Conclusions: Patients with AF and SND treated with CA were observed to have significantly lower risk of incident pacemaker implantation compared to those who had AAD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→