FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4377016034> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4377016034 endingPage "S78" @default.
• W4377016034 startingPage "S78" @default.
• W4377016034 abstract "The optimal rate control target for atrial fibrillation (AF) in the setting of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is not defined. Prior clinical trials have demonstrated benefits of AF ablation for patients with HFrEF, including recovery in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, it is unknown if degree of rate control prior to ablation affects outcomes. To evaluate whether degree of pre-ablation rate control impacts LVEF recovery following AF ablation in patients with HFrEF. A single center, retrospective cohort study of 75 consecutive patients with LVEF ≤35% who underwent first-time ablation for persistent AF at NYU Langone Health between January 2014 and January 2021. Patients were classified as having a LVEF recovery if their post-ablation LVEF was >35%. Proportion of patients with LVEF recovery were compared between multiple rate control cutoffs: 110 bpm, 90 bpm, and 70 bpm. A binomial logistic regression analysis was then performed examining the relationship of pre-ablation HR on LVEF recovery. The mean pre-ablation HR was 90±25 bpm, baseline LVEF was 27±6%, and 64% (48/75) of patients had at least 3 months of maximal GDMT prior to ablation (Table 1A). Significant improvement in LVEF was observed in all patient subgroups irrespective of rate control status (Figure 1A) and regardless of prior GDMT (Figure 1B). Overall, LVEF recovery to >35% occurred in 59% (44/75) of patients. Compared to patients with pre-ablation HR faster than evaluated rate control cutoffs (Table 1B), there were no differences in frequency of LVEF recovery when using ≤110 bpm (controlled: 58% vs. not controlled: 63%, p=0.73) or ≤90 bpm (controlled: 52% vs. not controlled: 66%, p=0.21). In contrast, patients achieving rate control ≤70 bpm were significantly less likely to have LVEF recovery (41%) compared to those with HR above the cutoff (66%; p=0.04). Binomial logistic regression analysis did not reveal HR as a significant predictor of LVEF recovery (OR=1.01; CI 95%=0.99-1.03; p=0.16). Catheter ablation of persistent in AF in patients with HFrEF frequently resulted in improvement in LVEF, irrespective of achieved rate control. LVEF recovery >35% following catheter ablation was reduced only with rate control of HR 70bpm. Catheter ablation should be considered in HFrEF patients regardless of degree of rate control achieved. Heart rate 70bpm should be evaluated as a goal for adequate rate control in patients with HFrEF in whom rhythm control is not pursued." @default.
• W4377016034 created "2023-05-19" @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5002599414 @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5018553083 @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5027535369 @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5037924265 @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5049595189 @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5054258744 @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5061833849 @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5075239818 @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5080994002 @default.
• W4377016034 creator A5091807315 @default.
• W4377016034 date "2023-05-01" @default.
• W4377016034 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W4377016034 title "CE-452776-3 IS RATE CONTROL EVER ADEQUATE? CATHER ABLATION IN RATE CONTROLLED ATRIAL FIBRILLATION WITH REDUCED EJECTION FRACTION" @default.
• W4377016034 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2023.03.367" @default.
• W4377016034 hasPublicationYear "2023" @default.
• W4377016034 type Work @default.
• W4377016034 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4377016034 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5002599414 @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5018553083 @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5027535369 @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5037924265 @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5049595189 @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5054258744 @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5061833849 @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5075239818 @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5080994002 @default.
• W4377016034 hasAuthorship W4377016034A5091807315 @default.
• W4377016034 hasBestOaLocation W43770160341 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConcept C2778198053 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConcept C2778902805 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConcept C2779161974 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConcept C78085059 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConceptScore W4377016034C126322002 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConceptScore W4377016034C164705383 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConceptScore W4377016034C2778198053 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConceptScore W4377016034C2778902805 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConceptScore W4377016034C2779161974 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConceptScore W4377016034C71924100 @default.
• W4377016034 hasConceptScore W4377016034C78085059 @default.
• W4377016034 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W4377016034 hasLocation W43770160341 @default.
• W4377016034 hasOpenAccess W4377016034 @default.
• W4377016034 hasPrimaryLocation W43770160341 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W2051712573 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W2077083067 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W2091139515 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W2355594703 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W2361407492 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W2538662566 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W3029306217 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W3033076790 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W4206264227 @default.
• W4377016034 hasRelatedWork W4382048704 @default.
• W4377016034 hasVolume "20" @default.
• W4377016034 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4377016034 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4377016034 workType "article" @default.