ArticleScientific reports2026
Tripolar versus bipolar ablation: insights into lesion growth and geometry using a novel ablation approach for therapy-refractory ventricular arrhythmias.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efficacy of bipolar radiofrequency ablation (BA) is often limited by high impedance between the two ablation catheters in cases of therapy-refractory ventricular tachycardias. Tripolar ablation (TA) is a novel approach, adding a dispersive return electrode to BA. The study aimed to investigate differences in lesion growth and geometry in BA and TA using variable power (20-50W) during power-controlled, irrigated radiofrequency ablation on cross-sections of porcine heart preparations in an ex-vivo model. Using high-resolution imaging at one-second intervals, 1694 measurements in 40 lesions were analyzed regarding lesion geometries and ablation parameters. Baseline impedance was lower in TA (213.1 ± 20.6 Ω vs. 242.7 ± 23.6 Ω, p < 0.001) and distinct differences in lesion geometry were present. Specifically, TA produced deeper and wider lesions at the active catheter compared to the return catheter, resulting in trapezoidal lesions in contrast to rectangular lesions in BA. All lesions reached transmurality; however, lesion width continued to increase in BA and TA after transmurality had been achieved. The majority of steam pops (16/18) occurred above 40W without differences in BA and TA. In cases of high baseline impedance, TA using an additional dispersive return electrode seems effective. In this experimental setup, TA creates trapezoidal lesions in contrast to rectangular lesions in BA without an associated increase in the risk of steam pops.
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.