Catheter Cryoablation of the Atrioventricular Node in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Novel Technology for Ablation of Cardiac Arrhythmias
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Recent animal studies demonstrated the feasibility and safety of applying percutaneous catheter cryoablation technology for ablation of arrhythmogenic sites. The studies also showed that reversible "ice mapping" can be performed before creating permanent lesions. We investigated the feasibility and safety of applying this new technology in man. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cryoablation of the AV node (AVN) using a 9-French quadripolar catheter with a 4-mm electrode tip was attempted in 12 patients (mean age 67.8 +/- 11.4 years) with refractory atrial fibrillation. Whereas technical issues prevented adequate tissue contact in two patients, complete AVN block was obtained in the remaining 10 patients after 4.8 +/- 1.9 cryoapplications lasting 5.5 +/- 0.2 minutes resulting in temperatures of -58.1 degrees +/- 5.4 degrees C. In all patients with sinus rhythm at the time of the procedure, cryomapping at warmer temperatures induced reversible AVN block and allowed confirmation of a successful site before definitive ablation. Intracardiac echocardiography was performed in three patients and allowed visualization of the cryocatheter-endocardial contact and cryolesion formation. No major procedural complications were reported. After 6 months of follow-up, 8 of 10 initially successful patients remained in complete block; 1 had partial recovery of AVN conduction manifested by atrial fibrillation with a slow ventricular response, and 1 fully recovered AVN conduction. CONCLUSION: (1) Catheter cryoablation of the AVN can be performed safely in man. (2) Reversible cryomapping is feasible and may offer an advantage over radiofrequency ablation. (3) Cryocatheter-endocardial contact and cryolesion growth can be monitored with intracardiac echocardiography.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".