MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395075774 · doi:10.1161/circep.123.012667

Predictors of Success for Pulmonary Vein Isolation With Pulsed-field Ablation Using a Variable-loop Catheter With 3D Mapping Integration: Complete 12-month Outcomes From inspIRE

2024· article· en· W4395075774 on OpenAlexaff
Tom De Potter, Massimo Grimaldi, Mattias Duytschaever, Ante Anić, Johan Vijgen, Petr Neužil, Hugo Van Herendael, Atul Verma, Allan C. Skanes, Helmut Pürerfellner, Gediminas Račkauskas, Pierre Jaı̈s, Vivek Y. Reddy

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersBiosense Webster
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary veinAblationCatheter ablationCatheterIsolation (microbiology)CardiologyInternal medicineLoop (graph theory)RadiologySurgeryBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We previously presented the safety and early efficacy of the inspIRE study (Study for Treatment of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation [PAF] by Pulsed-field Ablation [PFA] System With Irreversible Electroporation [IRE]). With the study's conclusion, we report the outcomes of the full pivotal study cohort, with an additional analysis of predictors of success. METHODS: InspIRE was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm clinical trial of drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Pulmonary vein isolation was performed with a variable-loop circular catheter integrated with a 3-dimensional mapping system. Follow-up with 24-hour Holter was at 3, 6, and 12 months, as well as remote rhythm monitoring: weekly from 3 to 5 months, monthly from 6 to 12 months, and for symptoms. The primary effectiveness end point (PEE) was acute pulmonary vein isolation plus freedom from any atrial arrhythmia at 12 months. Additional subanalyses report predictors of PEE success. RESULTS: -VASc 1.3±1.2. The previously reported primary adverse event rate was 0%. One serious procedure-related adverse event, urinary retention, was reported. The PEE was achieved in 75.6% (95% CI, 69.5%-81.8%). The clinical success of freedom from symptomatic recurrence was 81.7% (95% CI, 76.1%-87.2%). Simulating a monitoring method used in standard real-world practice (without protocol-driven remote rhythm monitoring), this translates to a freedom from all and symptomatic recurrence of 85.8% (95% CI, 80.8%-90.9%) or 94.0% (95% CI, 90.6%-97.5%), respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that left ventricular ejection fraction ≥60% (adjusted odds ratio, 0.30) and patients receiving ≥48 PFA applications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.28) were independent predictors of PEE success. Moreover, PEE success was 79.2% in patients who received ≥12 PFA applications per vein compared with 57.1% in patients receiving fewer PFA applications. CONCLUSIONS: The inspIRE study confirms the safety and effectiveness of pulmonary vein isolation using the novel 3-dimensional mapping integrated circular loop catheter. An optimal number of PFA applications (≥48 total or ≥12 per vein) resulted in an improved 1-year success rate of ≈80%. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04524364.

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 score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations37
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Arrhythmia and ElectrophysiologySame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207