MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7027262585

Catheter ablation for cardiac arrhythmias: A 14-year experience with 5330 consecutive patients at the Quebec Heart Institute, Laval Hospital

2007· article· en· W7027262585 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed Central · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrial flutterAblationCatheter ablationSupraventricular tachycardiaComplicationTachycardiaAtrial tachycardiaCatheterMyocardial infarction
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is a curative treatment with excellent success and minimal complication rates for patients with supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias. METHODS: The acute outcomes and complications of all catheter ablation procedures for supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias performed at the Quebec Heart Institute (Sainte-Foy, Quebec) during a 14-year period from January 1, 1993, to December 31, 2006, were prospectively assessed. The ablation procedures were classified according to the arrhythmias induced using standard electrophysiological techniques and definitions. Immediate success and complication rates were prospectively included in the database. RESULTS: A total of 5330 patients had catheter ablation performed at the Institute during the period assessed. The mean (± SD) age of patients was 50±18 years (range four to 97 years), and 2340 patients (44%) were men. Most of the patients were younger than 75 years (group 1), and 487 (9%) were 75 years of age and older (group 2). Indications for ablations were as follows: atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT) in 2263 patients, accessory pathways in 1147 patients, atrioventricular node ablation in 803 patients, typical atrial flutter in 377 patients and atrial tachycardia in 160 patients; 580 patients had other ablation procedures. The overall success rates were 81% for atrial tachycardia, 92% for accessory pathways or flutter, and 99% for AVNRT or atrioventricular node ablation. There was no difference in the success rates of the younger (group 1) and older (group 2) patients. Seventy-seven patients (1.4%) had complications, including 11 major events (myocardial infarction in one patient, pulmonary embolism in three patients and permanent pacemaker in seven patients). In patients undergoing AVNRT ablation, two had a permanent pacemaker implanted immediately after the procedure and three had a permanent pacemaker implanted at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm that radiofrequency ablation is safe and effective, supporting ablation therapy as a first-line therapy for the majority of patients with cardiac arrhythmias.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed CentralSame topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems StudiesFrench-language works237,207