Endothelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition (EndMT) was first reported in heart development. Recent studies have shown that EndMT also occurs in the progression of cardiac fibrosis. Herein, we demonstrated a critical role of the Forkhead Box M1 (Foxm1) transcription factor in transforming growth factor beta (TGF‐β)‐induced EndMT in endothelial cells (ECs) and a possible underlying molecular mechanism. Foxm1 was induced in ECs following TGF‐β stimulation. Using both pharmacological and molecular approaches to inhibit Foxm1 function can attenuate the TGF‐β‐induced EndMT and cell migration. In contrast, lentivirus‐mediated overexpression of Foxm1 allowed EndMT to proceed despite the absence of TGF‐β in ECs. Moreover, we found that the activation of the Smad2/3 signaling pathway and EndMT‐related transcription factors played important roles in the pathogenesis of Foxm1‐mediated EndMT. Further analysis revealed that Foxm1 bound to and increased the promoter activity of the Snail gene encoding a critical transcriptional regulator of EndMT. In conclusion, our results identify FOXM1 as a driver of TGF‐β‐induced EndMT and underscore the therapeutic potential of targeting FOXM1 for cardiac fibrosis.

Cryoablation is a promising alternative technique to RF ablation for treating paroxysmal AF with encouraging results. However, data about the efficacy and safety comparison between cryoablation and RF ablation is still lacking. We systematically search the PubMed, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases, and finally identify 16 eligible studies including 7195 patients (2863 for cryoablation; 4332 for RF ablation). Freedom from AF/atrial tachycardial replase is slightly higher in cryoablation than RF ablation during a median 12 months of follow-up, with no statistical significant (RR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.98–1.13, P = 0.159). In cryoablation, the procedure time is substantially shortened (WMD: −27.66, 95% CI: −45.24 to − 10.08, P = 0.002), whereas the fluoroscopy time is identical to RF ablation (WMD: −0.37, 95% CI: −2.78 to 2.04, P = 0.763). Procedure-related adverse events in cryoablation are parallel with that in RF ablation (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.86–1.35, P = 0.159). Compared with RF ablation, cryoablation present a comparable long-term AF/atrial tachycardial-free survival and procedure-related adverse events. Meanwhile, cryoablation markedly shorten the procedure time, nonetheless, with negligible impact on the fluoroscopy time.