MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226464563 · doi:10.1161/circep.121.010020

Intramural Needle Ablation for Refractory Premature Ventricular Contractions

2022· article· en· W4226464563 on OpenAlexaff
Srinivas R. Dukkipati, Tomofumi Nakamura, Ikutaro Nakajima, Connor P. Oates, Ryohsuke Narui, Shin‐ichi Tanigawa, Tatjana N. Sljapic, William Whang, Jacob S. Koruth, Subbarao Choudry, Benjamin Schaeffer, Akira Fujii, Usha B. Tedrow, John L. Sapp, William G. Stevenson, Vivek Y. Reddy

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAblationMedicineInterquartile rangeRadiofrequency ablationRefractory (planetary science)Ejection fractionCatheterClinical endpointCatheter ablationAdverse effectSalineCardiologySurgeryInternal medicineHeart failureRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Frequent premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) are often amenable to catheter ablation. However, a deep intramural focus may lead to failure due to inability of standard ablation techniques to penetrate the focus. We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of infusion needle ablation (INA) for PVCs that are refractory to standard radiofrequency ablation. Methods: Under 2 Food and Drug Administration approved protocols, INA was evaluated in patients with frequent PVCs that were refractory to standard ablation. Initial targets for ablation were selected by standard mapping techniques. INA was performed with a deflectable catheter equipped with an extendable/retractable needle at the tip that can be extended up to 12 mm into the myocardium and is capable of pacing and recording. After contrast injection for location assessment, radiofrequency ablation was performed with the needle tip using a temperature-controlled mode (maximum temperature 60 °C) with saline infusion from the needle. The primary end point was a decrease in PVC burden to <5000/24 hours at 6 months. The primary safety end point was incidence of procedure- or device-related serious adverse events. Results: At 4 centers, 35 patients (age 55.3±16.9 years, 74.2% male) underwent INA. The baseline median PVC burden was 25.4% (interquartile range, 18.4%–33.9%) and mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 37.7±12.3%. Delivering 10.3±8.0 INA lesions/patient (91% had adjunctive standard radiofrequency ablation also) resulted in acute PVC elimination in 71.4%. After a mean follow-up of 156±109 days, the primary efficacy end point was met in 73.3%. The median PVC burden decreased to 0.8% (interquartile range, 0.1%–6.0%; P <0.001). The primary safety end point occurred in 14.3% consisting of 1 (2.9%) heart block, 1 (2.9%) femoral artery dissection, and 3 (8.6%) pericardial effusions (all treated percutaneously). Conclusions: INA is effective for the elimination of frequent PVCs that are refractory to conventional ablation and is associated with an acceptable safety profile. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01791543 and NCT03204981.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Arrhythmia and ElectrophysiologySame topicCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207