MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767150709 · doi:10.1111/jce.13367

Intracardiac ablation for atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia using a 6 mm distal electrode cryoablation catheter: Prospective, multicenter, North American study (ICY‐AVNRT STUDY)

2017· article· en· W2767150709 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter Wells, Marc Dubuc, George J. Klein, Dan Dan, Jean-François Roux, Evan Lockwood, Marcio Sturmer, David Dunbar, Paul Novak, Arun Rao, Brett J. Peterson, Fred Kueffer, Kenneth A. Ellenbogen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de SherbrookeLondon Health Sciences CentreMontreal Heart Institute
FundersMedtronic
KeywordsCryoablationMedicineAblationCatheter ablationTachycardiaSupraventricular tachycardiaIntracardiac injectionAtrioventricular blockRadiofrequency ablationCatheterFluoroscopyCardiologyReentryInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Radiofrequency (RF) ablation is effective for slow pathway ablation, but carries a risk of inadvertent AV block requiring permanent pacing. By comparison, cryoablation with a 4-mm distal electrode catheter has not been reported to cause permanent AV block but has been shown to be less effective than RF ablation. We sought to define the safety and efficacy of a 6-mm distal electrode cryoablation catheter for slow pathway ablation in patients with atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT). METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-six U.S. and eight Canadian centers participated in the study. Patients with supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) thought likely to be AVNRT were enrolled. If AVNRT was inducible and confirmed to be the clinical SVT, then the slow pathway was targeted with a cryoablation catheter using a standardized protocol of best practices. Acute success was defined as inducibility of no more than one echo beat after cryoablation. Primary efficacy was defined as acute success and the absence of documented recurrent AVNRT over 6 months of follow-up. Primary safety was a composite of serious procedure-related adverse events and/or device-related complications. Note that 397 subjects met enrollment criteria after the EP study and received cryoablation. Mean ablation procedure duration (including a waiting period) was 89 ± 40 minutes, and mean fluoroscopy time was 4.8 ± 5.9 minutes. Isoproterenol was administered before cryoablation in 53% and after the last lesion in 85% of cases. Acute procedural success was realized in 95% (378 of 397) of subjects. No subject received a permanent pacemaker due to AV block. The slow pathway could not be ablated in 19 subjects, including: 12 due to inefficacy, 2 due to transient AV block, and 5 due to both inefficacy and transient AV block. RF ablation was used in the same procedure in 11 of 19 failed subjects, and was ineffective in 3 subjects. Among the group with acute success, 10 subjects (2.7%) had documented recurrent AVNRT over the 6-month follow-up period, and all occurred within 3 months of the index cryoablation. Serious procedure-related adverse events occurred in 4 subjects (1.0%), including one each: tamponade, pulmonary embolism, femoral vein hemorrhage, and diagnostic EP catheter knotting. None of these serious adverse events were related to use of the cryoablation catheter. Overall, 93% of subjects had successful slow pathway ablation at 6 months with the study cryoablation catheter. CONCLUSIONS: Cryoablation for AVNRT using a focal 6-mm catheter was safe and effective. It resulted in a low risk of recurrence over 6 months of follow-up with no incidence of AV block requiring permanent pacing.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations27
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular ElectrophysiologySame topicCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207