ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Clinical and experimental evaluation of averaged impedance drop during radiofrequency catheter ablation.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReal-time monitoring of myocardial tissue response during radiofrequency applications using a mesh-shaped flexible irrigation tip ablation catheter (TactiFlex) remains challenging. This study assessed the dynamics of averaged impedance drop percentage (AID%), a novel ablation parameter, and its association with conduction gaps and lesion characteristics.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 1,423 radiofrequency applications in 30 patients undergoing initial pulmonary vein isolation using TactiFlex to examine the relationship between AID% and radiofrequency applications within conduction gap segments. Mechanistic validation was performed using an ex-vivo porcine myocardial model (152 lesions).
resultsAmong 1,423 radiofrequency applications, 138 were located within conduction gap segments. AID% was lower in radiofrequency applications in conduction gap segments than in non-conduction gap segments, although the difference was modest (10.2 [8.3-12.2] % vs. 10.9 [9.0-13.1] %, p = 0.002). The overall discriminative performance was limited (area under the curve, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.63). In mixed-effects logistic regression accounting for within-patient clustering, AID% <10% was not significantly associated with radiofrequency applications in conduction gap segments (odds ratio, 1.560; 95% confidence interval, 0.970-2.500; p = 0.065), whereas average radiofrequency power was significant. In the ex vivo study, lesion characteristics varied according to radiofrequency power, contact force, and duration, even under fixed target AID% conditions.
conclusionsAID% reflects a composite impedance-based tissue response to radiofrequency delivery that is influenced by multiple ablation parameters. Its limited ability to discriminate conduction-gap segments, together with the variability in lesion characteristics across radiofrequency delivery conditions, suggests that AID% should be interpreted as a marker of tissue response rather than as a stand-alone lesion-quality metric. The averaged impedance drop percentage (AID%) reflects a composite impedance-based tissue response to radiofrequency delivery that is influenced by multiple ablation parameters. Its limited ability to discriminate conduction gap segments, together with the variability in lesion characteristics across radiofrequency delivery conditions, suggests that AID% should be interpreted as a marker of tissue response rather than as a stand-alone lesion-quality metric.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42690569What 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.