Atrial Tachycardias Encountered in the Context of Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation Part II: Mapping and Ablation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decade, there has been an exponential increase in the number of catheter ablation procedures performed for atrial fibrillation (AF). While for paroxysmal AF, proximal pulmonary vein isolation is sufficient in the majority of cases, ablation of persistent and longstanding AF requires an extensive surgical-like procedure. This approach is correlated with a high rate of AF termination; however, this is achieved at the cost of at least one atrial tachycardia (AT) during the index procedure or during the patient's follow-up in the vast majority of cases. As these ATs are often multiple, complex, and frequently more symptomatic than AF, they constitute the last and frequently the most difficult step in ablation for patients with persistent AF. This review concentrates on the practical approaches to the treatment of AT in the context of AF ablation and provides an algorithm that aims at facilitating mapping and ablation strategies using conventional electrophysiological tools.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".