MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390053261 · doi:10.1161/circep.123.012387

Colchicine to Prevent Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence After Catheter Ablation: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4390053261 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander P. Benz, Guy Amit, Stuart J. Connolly, J Singh, Juan G. Acosta‐Vélez, David Conen, Bishoy Deif, Syamkumar Divakaramenon, William F. McIntyre, Viwe Mtwesi, Jason D. Roberts, Jorge Wong, Robin Zhao, Jeff S. Healey

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreHamilton Health SciencesPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationAtrial flutterAtrial tachycardiaAblationCatheter ablationInternal medicineCardiologyPlaceboPopulationRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaHazard ratioColchicinePericarditisSurgeryConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Inflammation may promote atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after catheter ablation. This study aimed to evaluate a short-term anti-inflammatory treatment with colchicine following ablation of AF. METHODS: Patients scheduled for ablation were randomized to receive colchicine 0.6 mg twice daily or placebo for 10 days. The first dose of the study drug was administered within 4 hours before ablation. Atrial arrhythmia recurrence was defined as AF, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia >30 s on two 14-day Holters performed immediately and at 3 months following ablation. RESULTS: The modified intention-to-treat population included 199 patients (median age, 61 years; 22% female; 70% first procedure) who underwent radiofrequency (79%) or cryoballoon ablation (21%) of AF. Antiarrhythmic drugs were prescribed at discharge in 149 (75%) patients. Colchicine did not prevent atrial arrhythmia recurrence at 2 weeks (31% versus 32%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.98 [95% CI, 0.59–1.61]; P =0.92) or at 3 months following ablation (14% versus 15%; HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.45–2.02]; P =0.89). Postablation chest pain consistent with pericarditis was reduced with colchicine (4% versus 15%; HR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.09–0.77]; P =0.02) and colchicine increased diarrhea (26% versus 7%; HR, 4.74 [95% CI, 1.95–11.53]; P <0.001). During a median follow-up of 1.3 years, colchicine did not reduce a composite of emergency department visit, cardiovascular hospitalization, cardioversion, or repeat ablation (29 versus 25 per 100 patient-years; HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 0.69–1.99]; P =0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Colchicine administered for 10 days following catheter ablation did not reduce atrial arrhythmia recurrence or AF-associated clinical events, but did reduce postablation chest pain and increase diarrhea.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations43
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Arrhythmia and ElectrophysiologySame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207