Comparison of Pentaspline Pulsed Field Ablation Catheter Mapping Modes to Assess Pulmonary Vein Isolation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation
Rattachement africain : fr, au. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: We assessed the electro-anatomic mapping (EAM) capabilities of a pulsed field ablation (PFA) system previously guided by fluoroscopy to assess acquisition modes, and effects of near and far-field signal. METHODS: After pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) proven by pacing to check entrance and exit block, EAM was performed in 2 modes with the Faraview system during CS pacing. Mode 1 utilized bipoles between electrode 3 of each adjacent catheter spline. Mode 2 utilized a pseudo-unipole between electrode 3 and a combination of electrodes 1, 2, and 4 on individual splines. Signals and voltage map demonstration of PVI were compared with pacing assessment. Two observers assessed the maps with a third observer to resolve discrepancies. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (87% male, aged 58 ± 9 years) had PVI then mapping with the Faraview system. Pacing confirmed isolation of all pulmonary veins. Bipolar mapping (mode 1) displayed multiple apparent PV signals: only 32/61 (52%) of veins appeared isolated. On pseudo-unipolar mapping 59/61 (97%) of veins appeared isolated. The majority of variance in assessment (70.4%) was explainable by the mapping method with minimal variance attributed to observer. CONCLUSIONS: Pseudo-unipolar EAM Faraview mode appears the most accurate for assessment post-PVI compared with bipolar mode.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Comparison of Pentaspline Pulsed Field Ablation Catheter Mapping Modes to Assess Pulmonary Vein Isolation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation
- Date Crossref
- 19/07/2026
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.