ArticleJACC. Clinical electrophysiology2017
A Novel Defibrillation Tool: Percutaneously Delivered, Partially Insulated Epicardial Defibrillation.
Article in JACC. Clinical electrophysiology, 2017. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-traditional implantable cardioverter-defibrillator configurations and insertion techniques: a review of contemporary options.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022Review
- Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Hemodialysis and Chronic Kidney Disease Patients-An Experience-Based Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Innovations in Clinical Cardiac Electrophysiology: Challenges and Upcoming Solutions in 2018 and Beyond.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEpicardial defibrillation systems currently require surgical access. We aimed to develop a percutaneous defibrillation system with partially-insulated epicardial coils to focus electrical energy on the myocardium and prevent or minimize extra-cardiac stimulation.
methodsWe tested 2 prototypes created for percutaneous introduction into the pericardial space via a steerable sheath. This included a partially-insulated defibrillation coil and a defibrillation mesh with a urethane balloon acting as an insulator to the face of the mesh not in contact with the epicardium. The average energy associated with a chance of successful defibrillation 75% of the time (ED75) was calculated for each experiment.
resultsOf 16 animal experiments, 3 pig experiments had malfunctioning mesh prototypes such that results were unreliable; these were excluded. Therefore, 13 animal experiments were analyzed - 6 canines (29.8±4.0kg); 7 pigs (41.1±4.4kg). The overall ED75 was 12.8±6.7J (10.9±9.1J for canines; 14.4±3.9J in pigs [P=0.37]). The lowest ED75 obtained in canines was 2.5J while in pigs it was 9.5J. The lowest energy resulting in successful defibrillation was 2J in canines and 5J in pigs. There was no evidence of coronary vessel injury or trauma to extra-pericardial structures.
conclusionPercutaneous, epicardial defibrillation using a partially insulated coil is feasible and appears to be associated with low defibrillation thresholds. Focusing insulation may limit extra-cardiac stimulation and potentially lower energy requirements for efficient defibrillation.
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.