MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334804776 · doi:10.1093/europace/euu140

Resumption of dormant accessory pathway conduction with adenosine administration: a simple intervention to ensure successful accessory pathway ablation

2014· article· en· W2334804776 on OpenAlexaff
Asaf Danon, Kasthuri Nair, Sanjay Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueEP Europace · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAccessory pathwayAdenosineAblationCardiologyIntervention (counseling)Internal medicineCatheter ablation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 19-year-old with supraventricular tachycardia was referred for an electrophysiology study. Delta waves were absent and the HV interval 36 ms. Orthodromic atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia utilizing a left-septal accessory pathway (AP) was diagnosed and radiofrequency energy delivered at the site of earliest retrograde atrial activity during ventricular pacing. Loss of ventriculoatrial (VA) conduction occurred during ablation. Approximately 30 min post-ablation, administration of intravenous adenosine during ventricular pacing resulted in transient resumption of VA conduction (Panels A and B). As VA conduction was absent at various pacing rates and adenosine inhibits atrioventricular (AV) nodal conduction, our findings were consistent with transient retrograde AP conduction. Since VA conduction block persisted thereafter and for a total of 1 h post-ablation, the procedure was terminated. Unfortunately, there was recurrence of the index arrhythmia. This case highlights the utility of adenosine in unmasking dormant retrograde AP conduction post-ablation. Adenosine's effect in this case was not mediated by its effect on the AV node given the presence of VA conduction block prior to its administration. Rather, adenosine likely facilitated hyper-polarization of injured but still viable tissue at the AP atrial insertion site. Intra-procedural administration of adenosine may be valuable in identifying injured cardiac tissue, which may recover thereby resulting in future arrhythmia recurrence. The full-length version of this report can be viewed at: http://www.escardio.org/communities/EHRA/publications/ep-case-reports/Documents/Resumption-of-dormant-accessory-pathway.pdf.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEP EuropaceSame topicCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207