ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Universal Method of Compatibility Assessment for Novel Ablation Technologies With Different 3D Navigation Systems.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D mapping challenges in hybrid video-assisted thoracoscopic surgical ablation of Brugada syndrome.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2023Article
- Compatibility assessment of a temperature-controlled radiofrequency catheter with a novel electroanatomical mapping system.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: New technologies for ablation procedures are often produced by different companies with no cross-compatibility out of the box. This is not a negligible clinical problem since those separately developed devices are often used together. The aim of this study was to develop a bench-testing method to assess compatibility between the DiamondTemp ablation system (DTA) and the Rhythmia electroanatomic mapping system (EAM). Methods: Different setups were tested. DTA was connected to the Rhythmia EAM using the following configurations: 3.1. An Ensite EPT GenConnect box (GCB) and Rhythmia Maestro GCB (Maestro GCB, native Rhythmia setup); 3.2. The Medtronic GCB-E and Maestro GCB; 3.3. The Medtronic GCB-E out via the Medtronic GCB-E directly to the Rhythmia at box 1 (pin A61 to A64). Results: The DTA location was represented in real-time on the Rhythmia EAM. A proper tracking of the DTA was observed in all setups tested by visual comparison of physical catheter movements and its representation on EAM. In configuration 3.1, a significant shift was observed after the first radio frequency (RF) application; however, further applications caused no further shift. In setup 3.2, no significant shift was observed. The setup 3.3 showed a massive shift in the catheter position before ablation compared to baseline points acquired using the Orion catheter as a reference. Conclusions: A universal and reproducible solution for compatibility testing between the various mapping systems and the ablation catheters has been described. DTA has been demonstrated as compatible with Rhythmia EAM with satisfactory results if a specific setup is used.
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.