Usefulness of Transesophageal Echocardiography in the Isolation of Pulmonary Veins in the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: New imaging strategies for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation should enhance the safety of this technique. The role of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in this setting has not been prospectively evaluated. METHODS: Under general anesthesia, 85 patients underwent TEE-guided AF ablation. A hybrid technique was performed with circular pulmonary veins (PV) lesions and antrum and ostial electrical isolation guided by TEE. TEE excluded left atrial (LA) thrombus, guided transseptal puncture and catheter positioning, and helped to identify PV ostia and their velocities. The TEE probe localized the esophagus, its temperature (T degrees ) and micro bubbles formation. RESULTS: Overall, one patient had a LA clot. The esophagus was located close to left PV in 38%, the right PV in 28%, midline in 17% and with an oblique course in 17% of patients. Right and left superior PV velocities were detected in 100%, left inferior PV in 88% and right inferior PV in 82% of patients. Microbubbles were detected in 9 patients (11%). Elevation of TEE T degrees occurred in 14 patients (16%) and was regularly observed when lesions were applied over the TEE probe shadow, in close proximity to the posterior wall. Two major complications (1 tamponade, 1 PV laceration) occurred and were detected early by TEE. CONCLUSIONS: TEE offers advantages compared to a map-guided only approach. It is a reliable tool to assess esophagus T degrees and localization, guide transseptal puncture, delineate the PV ostia, and monitor complications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".