ReviewHerzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie2022
[Electromagnetic interference in 3D-mapping procedures].
Review in Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Catheter-based ablation is nowadays a safe and widespread procedure for the treatment of cardiac arrhythmia. This requires exact anatomical knowledge both before and during the examination and is an important prerequisite for targeted treatment. At the beginning of the era of interventional catheter-based treatment, fluoroscopy was the only and usual means of visualization, whereas in the middle of the 1990s continuous 3D-mapping systems were developed for the non-fluoroscopic examination of patients. The correct use of these 3‑D systems, which non-fluoroscopically visualize the catheter and mostly identify mechanisms of arrhythmia in great detail, nowadays makes an important contribution to successful interventional catheter treatment of arrhythmia; however, it is not uncommon for patients with ventricular arrhythmia to also carry implanted electronic devices, such as pacemakers, defibrillators or less frequently left ventricular hemodynamic support systems. All implantable devices lead to electromagnetic interferences, which can complicate the diagnostics and treatment during electrophysiological examinations and ablation. This article addresses the adversities and experiences associated with magnet-based 3D systems and implantable electromagnetically active cardiac devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35970909What 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.