ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2021
Assessment of an ECG-Based System for Localizing Ventricular Arrhythmias in Patients With Structural Heart Disease.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-Based QRS Onset Detection in the Early Ventricular Activation Site ECGs.IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics · 2026Article
- Assessment of Intraprocedural Automated Arrhythmia Origin Localization System for Localizing Pacing Sites in 3D Space.JACC. Clinical electrophysiology · 2025Article
- A Deep Learning Approach Toward Differentiating Left versus Right for Idiopathic Ventricular Arrhythmia Originated from Outflow Tract.Journal of medical signals and sensors · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of ChatGPT for 12-lead ECG-based localisation of ventricular ectopic foci prior to catheter ablation.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Prognostic impact of morphology and duration of premature ventricular contractions in a population without structural heart disease.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2023Article
- Strain Imaging and Ventricular Arrhythmia.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Comparison of dipole-based and potential-based ECGI methods for premature ventricular contraction beat localization with clinical data.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Article
- Deep Learning-Based Electrocardiograph in Evaluating Radiofrequency Ablation for Rapid Arrhythmia.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background We have previously developed an intraprocedural automatic arrhythmia-origin localization (AAOL) system to identify idiopathic ventricular arrhythmia origins in real time using a 3-lead ECG. The objective was to assess the localization accuracy of ventricular tachycardia (VT) exit and premature ventricular contraction (PVC) origin sites in patients with structural heart disease using the AAOL system. Methods and Results In retrospective and prospective case series studies, a total of 42 patients who underwent VT/PVC ablation in the setting of structural heart disease were recruited at 2 different centers. The AAOL system combines 120-ms QRS integrals of 3 leads (III, V2, V6) with pace mapping to predict VT exit/PVC origin site and projects that site onto the patient-specific electroanatomic mapping surface. VT exit/PVC origin sites were clinically identified by activation mapping and/or pace mapping. The localization error of the VT exit/PVC origin site was assessed by the distance between the clinically identified site and the estimated site. In the retrospective study of 19 patients with structural heart disease, the AAOL system achieved a mean localization accuracy of 6.5±2.6 mm for 25 induced VTs. In the prospective study with 23 patients, mean localization accuracy was 5.9±2.6 mm for 26 VT exit and PVC origin sites. There was no difference in mean localization error in epicardial sites compared with endocardial sites using the AAOL system (6.0 versus 5.8 mm,
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.