Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation for Pediatric Paroxysmal Supraventricular Tachycardia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) in treating children with paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT). METHODS: From inception to December 16, 2023, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), VIP (Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database), and WanFang were searched for this meta-analysis. Children under the age of 18 diagnosed with atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (AVRT) and atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) were enrolled. The outcomes included the success rate of RFCA, the recurrence rate of PSVT following RFCA treatment, and any complications associated with the procedure. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of studies. The outcome data were represented as rates (RATE) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses were conducted based on regions and follow-ups. RESULTS: Fourteen articles encompassing 6,032 children were included in the study. RFCA demonstrated remarkable efficacy in children patients, achieving success rates of 98% (RATE: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.96-0.99) for AVRT and 99% (RATE: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98-1.00) for AVNRT. The analysis also reveals that post-RFCA, the recurrence rates for AVRT were 5% (RATE: 0.05, 95% CI: 0.03-0.07), while for AVNRT, they were slightly lower at 4% (RATE: 0.04, 95% CI: 0.02-0.08). In the subset of Asian children patients, these recurrence rates were observed to be 5% for AVRT and 3% for AVNRT. Monitoring for a duration of up to 12 months of post-RFCA indicated recurrence rates of 4% for AVRT and 3% for AVNRT. However, for follow-up periods extending beyond 1 year, there was a slight increase in these rates to 4% for AVRT and 6% for AVNRT. Additionally, the complication rates associated with RFCA in the children population were relatively minimal, recorded at 2% (RATE: 0.02, 95% CI: -0.01-0.06) for AVRT and 1% (RATE: 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00-0.02) for AVNRT. CONCLUSION: RFCA appears to be a highly effective and safe treatment option for AVRT and AVNRT in children, with high success rates and relatively low recurrence and complication rates. However, long-term follow-up may be necessary to monitor for potential recurrences. These findings are valuable for clinicians and patients in making informed decisions about the treatment of these cardiac arrhythmias in pediatric patients.
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 | 0.014 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.046 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".