ArticlePloS one2015
Automatic supporting system for regionalization of ventricular tachycardia exit site in implantable defibrillators.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Big Data in electrophysiology.Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2022Review
- Applications of Machine Learning in Cardiac Electrophysiology.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electrograms stored in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICD-EGM) have been proven to convey useful information for roughly determining the anatomical location of the Left Ventricular Tachycardia exit site (LVTES). Our aim here was to evaluate the possibilities from a machine learning system intended to provide an estimation of the LVTES anatomical region with the use of ICD-EGM in the situation where 12-lead electrocardiogram of ventricular tachycardia are not available. Several machine learning techniques were specifically designed and benchmarked, both from classification (such as Neural Networks (NN), and Support Vector Machines (SVM)) and regression (Kernel Ridge Regression) problem statements. Classifiers were evaluated by using accuracy rates for LVTES identification in a controlled number of anatomical regions, and the regression approach quality was studied in terms of the spatial resolution. We analyzed the ICD-EGM of 23 patients (18±10 EGM per patient) during left ventricular pacing and simultaneous recording of the spatial coordinates of the pacing electrode with a navigation system. Several feature sets extracted from ICD-EGM (consisting of times and voltages) were shown to convey more discriminative information than the raw waveform. Among classifiers, the SVM performed slightly better than NN. In accordance with previous clinical works, the average spatial resolution for the LVTES was about 3 cm, as in our system, which allows it to support the faster determination of the LVTES in ablation procedures. The proposed approach also provides with a framework suitable for driving the design of improved performance future systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.