Remote Ischemic Preconditioning for Electrical Cardioversion of Atrial Fibrillation—the Prospective Randomized PRECON-AF Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Electrical cardioversion (ECV) is highly effective in restoring sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but it does not influence long-term rhythm control. Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) has demonstrated various cardioprotective effects. Combining ECV with RIPC could provide a promising approach to minimizing AF recurrences after successful ECV. Methods: This prospective, randomized, single-blinded, single-centre study investigated the impact of RIPC on early AF recurrence following successful ECV (defined as sinus rhythm ≥ 30 seconds). Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either RIPC or sham preconditioning before ECV. RIPC was performed in a standardized manner, with 3 cycles of 5-minute forearm ischemia followed by 5 minutes of reperfusion. The primary efficacy endpoint was AF recurrence after 30 days. Safety endpoints included death, stroke, and procedure-related complications. Secondary endpoints were acute ECV success, mean energy, and number of shocks required to restore sinus rhythm. Results: = 0.63), and no effect of RIPC on cardioversion parameters was seen. One stroke occurred in the RIPC group. The study was terminated before the number of prespecified follow-up visits was reached, due to determination of futility. Conclusions: RIPC did not impact the short-term rhythm-control or cardioversion procedure in patients with AF undergoing ECV. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05342220.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".