Tachycardia Transition During Ablation of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The "sequential ablation" strategy for persistent AF is aimed at progressive organization of AF until the rhythm converts to sinus rhythm or atrial tachycardia (AT). During ablation of an AT, apparently seamless transitions from one organized AT to another occur. The purpose of our study was to quantify the occurrence and the mechanism of this transition. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-nine of 90 patients undergoing ablation for persistent AF had multiple AT during the procedure and constitute the study group. Thirty-nine direct transitions from one AT to another during ablation were observed classified in four types: type I (79.4%), i.e., a direct transition of a faster to a slower tachycardia without significant intervening pause; type II (7.69%)--transition after intervening ectopy or longer pause; type III (10.26%)--A slower AT accelerated; type IV (2.56%)--alteration of activation sequence but with no change on CL. CONCLUSIONS: Transition to a second AT occurs frequently in the midst of ablation of AT in persistent AF patients. This transition occurs most commonly abruptly within the range of a single cycle length of the original AT. This is best explained by a continuation of AT that was "present" simultaneously with the pretransition tachycardia, being "entrained" (for a reentrant tachycardia) or "overdriven" for an automatic focal tachycardia. The presence of multiple tachycardia mechanisms active simultaneously would be consistent with the eclectic pathophysiology of persistent AF.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".