Patient-specific simulations predict efficacy of ablation of interatrial connections for treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Treatments for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) offer limited efficacy. One potential strategy aims to return the right atrium (RA) to sinus rhythm (SR) by ablating interatrial connections (IAC) to isolate the atria, but there is limited clinical data to evaluate this ablation approach. We aimed to use simulation to evaluate and predict patient-specific suitability for ablation of IAC to treat AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Persistent AF was simulated in 12 patient-specific geometries, incorporating electrophysiological heterogeneity and fibres, with IAC at Bachmann's bundle, the coronary sinus, and fossa ovalis. Simulations were performed to test the effect of left atrial (LA)-to-RA frequency gradient and fibrotic remodelling on IAC ablation efficacy. During AF, we simulated ablation of one, two, or all three IAC, with or without pulmonary vein isolation and determined if this altered or terminated the arrhythmia. For models without structural remodelling, ablating all IAC terminated RA arrhythmia in 83% of cases. Models with the LA-to-RA frequency gradient removed had an increased success rate (100% success). Ablation of IACs is less effective in cases with fibrotic remodelling (interstitial fibrosis 50% success rate; combination remodelling 67%). Mean number of phase singularities in the RA was higher pre-ablation for IAC failure (success 0.6 ± 0.8 vs. failure 3.2 ± 2.5, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This simulation study predicts that IAC ablation is effective in returning the RA to SR for many cases. Patient-specific modelling approaches have the potential to stratify patients prior to ablation by predicting if drivers are located in the LA or RA. We present a platform for predicting efficacy and informing patient selection for speculative treatments.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".