Association between ablation-induced baroreceptor reflex modification and procedure efficacy in patients with atrial fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The autonomic nervous system (ANS) plays a significant role in atrial fibrillation (AF). Catheter ablation (CA) is a well-established treatment method for AF and significantly affects the ANS, including baroreceptor (BR) function. However, little is known about the changes in BR function caused by radiofrequency (RF) or cryoballoon energy (CB) and its impact on future AF recurrences. Purpose To assess 1-year efficacy of CA of AF in relation to BR function modification and type of ablation energy used. Methods The study group consisted of 78 patients (25 females, mean age 58 ± 9 years) with paroxysmal AF and first CA (39 patients in the RF group and 39 in the CB group). The BR function was assessed non-invasively, using tilt testing before and after CA, and three BR parameters were calculated: event count (BREC) depicting overall BR activity, slope mean depicting BR sensitivity (BRS), and BR effectiveness index (BEI). The efficacy of CA was assessed during 1-year follow-up, which consisted of ambulatory visits and 24-h Holter ECG recordings at 3, 6, and 12 months after CA. The quality of life was assessed by using a dedicated scale [University of Toronto Atrial Fibrillation Severity Scale (AFSS)]. Results The two groups did not show differences in terms of clinical or demographic data. One-year follow-up was completed for 35 (89.7%) patients from the CB group and for 34 (87.2%) from the RF group. The rates of efficacy of CB and RF were similar [31/35 (88.6%) vs. 26/34 (76.5%), respectively]. After CA, the BR function decreased in both groups, with a significantly greater decrease in the CB group. The changes in BR parameters were similar in both responders and non-responders after CA in the whole group [BREC 10.0 (2.0–24.0) vs. 12.0 (4.0–21.5), p = 0.939; BRS 5.4 (3.7–6.5) vs. 4.8 (3.6–7.2), p = 0.809; BEI 24.8 (15.9–27.4) vs. 17.5 (8.9–27.5), p = 0.508, respectively]. According to the AFSS, the AF symptoms were significantly reduced in both groups to a similar extent. Conclusions CA for AF significantly decreased the BR function, especially in patients undergoing CB. There was no correlation between CA-induced changes in BR parameters and ablation outcome.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".