FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2045222947> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2045222947 endingPage "1035" @default.
• W2045222947 startingPage "1029" @default.
• W2045222947 abstract "Background Remote magnetic navigation (RMN) has been reported as a feasible and safe mapping and ablation system for treatment of ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). However, the reported success rates have been limited with the 4- and 8-mm catheter tips. Objective This study sought to report the results in a large series of consecutive patients undergoing radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation of VAs using the RMN with the 3.5-mm magnetic open-irrigated-tip catheter (OIC). Methods A total of 110 consecutive patients with a clinical history of left VA were included in the study. In all cases, an OIC was utilized for mapping and ablation. When ablation with the RMN catheters failed, a manual OIC was used to eliminate the VA. Postablation pacing maneuvers and isoproterenol were used to verify the inducibility of the VAs. Outcomes were compared with those of a group of 92 consecutive patients undergoing manual ablation by the same operator. Results Mapping and ablation with the magnetic OIC were performed in all 110 patients with VA. Ischemic cardiomyopathy was present in 33 (30%), nonischemic in 14 (13%), and in 63 (57%) patients no structural heart disease was present. Endocardial mapping was performed in all patients, whereas both endocardial and epicardial mapping were performed in 36 (33%) patients. Compared with manual ablation, RMN was associated with a longer procedural time (2.9 ± 1.2 hours vs. 3.3 ± 1.1 hours, P = 0.004) and RF time (24 ± 12 minutes vs. 33 ± 18 minutes, P = 0.005), whereas fluoroscopic time was significantly shorter (35 ± 22 minutes vs. 26 ± 14 minutes, P = 0.033). During the procedures, crossover to manual ablation was required in 15 patients (14%). At 11.7 ± 2.1 months of follow-up in the study group and 18.7 ± 3.7 months in the manual ablation group, 85% and 86% (P = 0.817) of patients, respectively, were free of VA. Conclusion This large series of consecutive patients demonstrates that OIC ablation using RMN is effective for the treatment of left VAs. Remote magnetic navigation (RMN) has been reported as a feasible and safe mapping and ablation system for treatment of ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). However, the reported success rates have been limited with the 4- and 8-mm catheter tips. This study sought to report the results in a large series of consecutive patients undergoing radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation of VAs using the RMN with the 3.5-mm magnetic open-irrigated-tip catheter (OIC). A total of 110 consecutive patients with a clinical history of left VA were included in the study. In all cases, an OIC was utilized for mapping and ablation. When ablation with the RMN catheters failed, a manual OIC was used to eliminate the VA. Postablation pacing maneuvers and isoproterenol were used to verify the inducibility of the VAs. Outcomes were compared with those of a group of 92 consecutive patients undergoing manual ablation by the same operator. Mapping and ablation with the magnetic OIC were performed in all 110 patients with VA. Ischemic cardiomyopathy was present in 33 (30%), nonischemic in 14 (13%), and in 63 (57%) patients no structural heart disease was present. Endocardial mapping was performed in all patients, whereas both endocardial and epicardial mapping were performed in 36 (33%) patients. Compared with manual ablation, RMN was associated with a longer procedural time (2.9 ± 1.2 hours vs. 3.3 ± 1.1 hours, P = 0.004) and RF time (24 ± 12 minutes vs. 33 ± 18 minutes, P = 0.005), whereas fluoroscopic time was significantly shorter (35 ± 22 minutes vs. 26 ± 14 minutes, P = 0.033). During the procedures, crossover to manual ablation was required in 15 patients (14%). At 11.7 ± 2.1 months of follow-up in the study group and 18.7 ± 3.7 months in the manual ablation group, 85% and 86% (P = 0.817) of patients, respectively, were free of VA. This large series of consecutive patients demonstrates that OIC ablation using RMN is effective for the treatment of left VAs." @default.
• W2045222947 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5010856177 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5011226209 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5022983204 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5032707613 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5037367911 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5052446138 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5062726317 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5068354252 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5070690638 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5074675419 @default.
• W2045222947 creator A5078241266 @default.
• W2045222947 date "2010-08-01" @default.
• W2045222947 modified "2023-10-03" @default.
• W2045222947 title "Endo-epicardial ablation of ventricular arrhythmias in the left ventricle with the Remote Magnetic Navigation System and the 3.5-mm open irrigated magnetic catheter: Results from a large single-center case–control series" @default.
• W2045222947 cites W1448138781 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W1964165813 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W1967033073 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W1976766063 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W1998017612 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W1999367437 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2001252609 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2019160325 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2021453063 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2027243943 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2034192356 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2038563994 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2041700315 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2042539030 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2060587048 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2089333822 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2110520093 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2125765527 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2134899468 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2138736911 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2165632537 @default.
• W2045222947 cites W2616039959 @default.
• W2045222947 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2010.04.036" @default.
• W2045222947 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20434589" @default.
• W2045222947 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2045222947 type Work @default.
• W2045222947 sameAs 2045222947 @default.
• W2045222947 citedByCount "32" @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472012 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472013 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472014 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472015 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472016 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472017 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472018 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472019 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472020 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472021 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472022 @default.
• W2045222947 countsByYear W20452229472023 @default.
• W2045222947 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5010856177 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5011226209 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5022983204 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5032707613 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5037367911 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5052446138 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5062726317 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5068354252 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5070690638 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5074675419 @default.
• W2045222947 hasAuthorship W2045222947A5078241266 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConcept C2776131983 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConcept C2778902805 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConcept C2778921608 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConcept C2781267111 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConceptScore W2045222947C126322002 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConceptScore W2045222947C141071460 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConceptScore W2045222947C164705383 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConceptScore W2045222947C2776131983 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConceptScore W2045222947C2778902805 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConceptScore W2045222947C2778921608 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConceptScore W2045222947C2781267111 @default.
• W2045222947 hasConceptScore W2045222947C71924100 @default.
• W2045222947 hasIssue "8" @default.
• W2045222947 hasLocation W20452229471 @default.
• W2045222947 hasLocation W20452229472 @default.
• W2045222947 hasOpenAccess W2045222947 @default.
• W2045222947 hasPrimaryLocation W20452229471 @default.
• W2045222947 hasRelatedWork W1969574222 @default.
• W2045222947 hasRelatedWork W2011506585 @default.
• W2045222947 hasRelatedWork W2018590785 @default.
• W2045222947 hasRelatedWork W2072426057 @default.
• W2045222947 hasRelatedWork W2082261611 @default.
• W2045222947 hasRelatedWork W2179224909 @default.
• W2045222947 hasRelatedWork W2365021524 @default.
• W2045222947 hasRelatedWork W2885029286 @default.
• W2045222947 hasRelatedWork W3216477786 @default.

• next