2010
DOI: 10.33549/physiolres.932007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Radiofrequency ablation in treatment of atrial fibrillation

Abstract: Beside heart failure and metabolic syndrome, atrial fibrillation is termed the cardiovascular epidemic of the 21st century. Its increased morbidity and mortality is alarming. The present, most effective therapy of atrial fibrillation is catheter ablation. Successful ablation of atrial fibrillation prevents the occurrence and progression of electrical, structural and mechanic myocardium remodelling, improves function of the left ventricle, and prevents the risk of thrombembolism. Onset of sinus rhythm activates… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 16 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Currently, catheter ablation procedures, such as radiofrequency ablation and cryoballoon ablation, are commonly used for the treatment of AF. Radiofrequency ablation applies high-frequency alternating current to cause myocardial tissue damage ( 5 ), while cryoballoon ablation relies on low-temperature energy to induce cellular necrosis through freezing ( 6 ). However, both techniques carry the risk of excessive damage and require control over the ablation energy, which may result in incomplete ablation or adverse effects on surrounding tissues and blood vessels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently, catheter ablation procedures, such as radiofrequency ablation and cryoballoon ablation, are commonly used for the treatment of AF. Radiofrequency ablation applies high-frequency alternating current to cause myocardial tissue damage ( 5 ), while cryoballoon ablation relies on low-temperature energy to induce cellular necrosis through freezing ( 6 ). However, both techniques carry the risk of excessive damage and require control over the ablation energy, which may result in incomplete ablation or adverse effects on surrounding tissues and blood vessels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%