MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022214876 · doi:10.1016/j.jacep.2020.04.024

Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Ablation With Contact Force–Sensing Catheter

2020· article· en· W3022214876 on OpenAlexaffabout
Moussa Mansour, Hugh Calkins, José Osorio, Scott J. Pollak, Daniel P. Melby, Francis E. Marchlinski, Charles A. Athill, Craig Delaughter, Anshul M. Patel, Philip J. Gentlesk, Brian DeVille, Laurent Macle, Kenneth A. Ellenbogen, Srinivas R. Dukkipati, Vivek Y. Reddy, Andrea Natale

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC. Clinical electrophysiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
FundersBiosense WebsterBiotronikBoston Scientific CorporationPfizerBoehringer IngelheimMedtronicAbbott Laboratories
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationCatheter ablationAblationAdverse effectAtrial flutterCatheterCardiologyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (PsAF) using a porous tip contact force-sensing catheter. BACKGROUND: Although the safety and effectiveness of catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation are established, there are limited data on outcomes in patients with PsAF. As such, no ablation catheter is currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for PsAF ablation. METHODS: The prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized PRECEPT (Prospective Review of the Safety and Effectiveness of the THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH SF Catheter Evaluated for Treating Symptomatic PersistenT AF) study was conducted at 27 sites in the United States and Canada. Enrollment criteria included documented symptomatic PsAF and nonresponse or intolerance to ≥1 antiarrhythmic drug (Class I or III). An individualized treatment approach was used including pulmonary vein isolation with ablation of additional targets permitted at the investigators' discretion. To optimize treatment outcomes, a 3-month post-ablation medication adjustment period followed by a 3-month therapy consolidation period were included. Arrhythmia recurrences were stringently monitored by monthly and symptomatic transtelephonic monitoring, electrocardiography, and Holter monitoring for up to 15 months after ablation. RESULTS: Of 381 enrolled participants, 348 had the investigational catheter inserted and underwent ablation. The primary adverse event rate was 4.1% (15 events in 14 participants). Kaplan-Meier analyses estimated a primary effectiveness success rate of 61.7% and a clinical success rate of 80.4% at 15 months. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate the clinical safety and effectiveness of PsAF ablation using contact force-sensing technologies. The primary adverse event was within the expected range and similar to those reported in historical studies of paroxysmal AF ablation. (Prospective Review of the Safety and Effectiveness of the THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH SF Catheter Evaluated for Treating Symptomatic PersistenT AF; NCT02817776).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations78
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACC. Clinical electrophysiologySame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207