MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087853315 · doi:10.1115/1.4048536

Computational Modeling of Cardiac Ablation Incorporating Electrothermomechanical Interactions

2020· article· en· W3087853315 on OpenAlexaff
Sundeep Singh, Roderick Melnik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering and Science in Medical Diagnostics and Therapy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAblationBlood flowCardiac AblationBiomedical engineeringRadiofrequency ablationElectrodeMaterials sciencePerfusionVolumetric flow rateRf ablationCatheter ablationCardiologyMedicineMechanicsChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The application of radio frequency ablation (RFA) has been widely explored in treating various types of cardiac arrhythmias. Computational modeling provides a safe and viable alternative to ex vivo and in vivo experimental studies for quantifying the effects of different variables efficiently and reliably, apart from providing a priori estimates of the ablation volume attained during cardiac ablation procedures. In this contribution, we report a fully coupled electrothermomechanical model for a more accurate prediction of the treatment outcomes during the radio frequency cardiac ablation. A numerical model comprising of cardiac tissue and the cardiac chamber has been developed in which an electrode has been inserted perpendicular to the cardiac tissue to simulate actual clinical procedures. Temperature-dependent heat capacity, electrical and thermal conductivities, and blood perfusion rate have been considered to model more realistic scenarios. The effects of blood flow and contact force of the electrode tip on the treatment outcomes of a fully coupled model of RFA have been systematically investigated. The numerical study demonstrates that the predicted ablation volume of RFA is significantly dependent on the blood flow rate in the cardiac chamber and also on the tissue deformation induced due to electrode insertion depth of 1.5 mm or higher.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.017
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering and Science in Medical Diagnostics and TherapySame topicCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207