Intracardiac pulsed field ablation: Proof of feasibility in a chronic porcine model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency (RF) has become an accepted energy source for myocardial ablation but may result in discontinuous lesions and nontargeted tissue injury. We examined the feasibility and safety of lesion formation using high-amplitude, bipolar pulsed electric fields delivered from a multielectrode array catheter. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare duty-cycled radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to pulsed field ablation (PFA) in terms of acute electrical effects, 2-week lesion formation, and injury to nontargeted tissues. METHODS: Intracardiac ablations were performed in 6 pigs using a circular pulmonary vein ablation catheter. The energy source for ablation delivery was randomized to deliver either PFA or RFA to 3 atrial endocardial sites. Bipolar pace capture and electrogram amplitude measurements were recorded at each site. Histopathology and necropsies were performed after 2 weeks. RESULTS: The circular pulmonary vein ablation catheter was used to deliver pulsed electric fields to produce cardiac lesions without skeletal muscle stimulation. Evaluating all ablations in each site, electrogram amplitudes were reduced to <0.5 mV in 67.5% of PFA vs 27.0% of RFA deliveries (P <.001). Bipolar cardiac capture was lost after 100% vs 92.0% of PFA vs RFA (P = .005). At 2 weeks, PFA resulted in consistent transmural and homogeneous replacement fibrosis devoid of lingering myocyte "sequesters." RFA lesions showed a stronger inflammatory response extending to the epicardial fat, arterial injury, and thrombosis. Neither PFA nor RFA lesions showed endocardial thrombus. CONCLUSION: Intracardiac PFA can be feasibly delivered from a circular catheter to create fibrotic lesions that have acute electrical effects, without injury to nontargeted tissue.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".