Michal Orczykowski, Maciej Bak, Krzysztof Kaczmarek, Piotr Urbanek, Bodalski Robert, Krzysztof Dubowski, Grzegorz Warminski, Pawel Derejko, Pawel Ptaszynski, Maciej Sterlinski, Maria Bilinska, Lukasz Szumowski
{"title":"机器人磁导航消融中接触力的影响因素。","authors":"Michal Orczykowski, Maciej Bak, Krzysztof Kaczmarek, Piotr Urbanek, Bodalski Robert, Krzysztof Dubowski, Grzegorz Warminski, Pawel Derejko, Pawel Ptaszynski, Maciej Sterlinski, Maria Bilinska, Lukasz Szumowski","doi":"10.1111/jce.16597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Stability of catheter-tissue contact in the robotic magnetic navigation (RMN) system is one of the key features that distinguishes this system from manually guided catheters. Numerous studies have shown that contact force (CF) in manually controlled catheters is as crucial for forming an optimal lesion as the duration of application or power. Catheters used in the RMN system lack a quantitative method for intraoperative monitoring of this parameter. Our study aims to partially address this gap in scientific knowledge.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a total of 1200 CF measurements using the RMN system (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA), a magnetic-guided 8 Fr RF ablation catheter (THERMOCOOL RMT Catheter, Biosense Webster, Irvine, CA, USA) inserted through a long sheath (SR0, Abbott Cardiovascular, Nathan Lane North, Plymouth, MN, USA), and a precision jewelry scale (IKEME, Guangdong, CN). We analyzed the impact on the obtained CF values of four different magnetic field vectors (transverse, sagittal, caudal, and cranial), two field strengths (0.1T and 0.08T), and three catheter extension configurations from the long sheath (with Position 1 being the least extended and Position 3 the most extended).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The contact force values varied significantly across the different magnetic field vectors, field strengths, and catheter extensions from the vascular sheath.</p>\n \n <p>The greatest differences in achieved values were observed across the different magnetic field vectors in the Position 1, ranging from 3.52 ± 0.1 g (caudal plane) to 15.15 ± 0.05 g (cranial plane) at 0.08 Tesla (T) field strength (<i>p</i> < 0.001), and from 4.10 ± 0.06 g (caudal) to 15.01 ± 0.07 g (cranial) at 0.1 T, <i>p</i> < 0.001. Differences in other vectors reached approximately 20%.</p>\n \n <p>The highest CF values were obtained in Position 1, intermediate values in Position 2, and the lowest in Position 3. An exception was the transverse vector, where, particularly with a magnetic field of 0.1 T, more similar values were observed across Positions 1–3, with respective values of 8.61 ± 0.14 g, 9.36 ± 0.06 g, and 8.31 ± 0.05 g.</p>\n \n <p>A stronger magnetic field (0.1 T compared to 0.08 T) resulted in higher CF values, especially during measurements in the transverse vector. This effect was most pronounced in the most extended catheter from the sheath - Position 3 (with respective values of 4.54 ± 0.09 g vs. 8.31 ± 0.05 g, <i>p</i> < 0.001). In the sagittal, cranial, and caudal vectors, the differences were less noticeable.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Different magnetic field vectors, catheter extensions from the sheath, and magnetic field strengths result in varying contact force values. For effective radiofrequency ablation lesions, these factors should be considered alongside power, duration, and other established parameters.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15178,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","volume":"36 4","pages":"855-862"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors Influencing Contact Force in Robotic Magnetic Navigation Ablation\",\"authors\":\"Michal Orczykowski, Maciej Bak, Krzysztof Kaczmarek, Piotr Urbanek, Bodalski Robert, Krzysztof Dubowski, Grzegorz Warminski, Pawel Derejko, Pawel Ptaszynski, Maciej Sterlinski, Maria Bilinska, Lukasz Szumowski\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jce.16597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>Stability of catheter-tissue contact in the robotic magnetic navigation (RMN) system is one of the key features that distinguishes this system from manually guided catheters. Numerous studies have shown that contact force (CF) in manually controlled catheters is as crucial for forming an optimal lesion as the duration of application or power. Catheters used in the RMN system lack a quantitative method for intraoperative monitoring of this parameter. Our study aims to partially address this gap in scientific knowledge.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We conducted a total of 1200 CF measurements using the RMN system (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA), a magnetic-guided 8 Fr RF ablation catheter (THERMOCOOL RMT Catheter, Biosense Webster, Irvine, CA, USA) inserted through a long sheath (SR0, Abbott Cardiovascular, Nathan Lane North, Plymouth, MN, USA), and a precision jewelry scale (IKEME, Guangdong, CN). We analyzed the impact on the obtained CF values of four different magnetic field vectors (transverse, sagittal, caudal, and cranial), two field strengths (0.1T and 0.08T), and three catheter extension configurations from the long sheath (with Position 1 being the least extended and Position 3 the most extended).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The contact force values varied significantly across the different magnetic field vectors, field strengths, and catheter extensions from the vascular sheath.</p>\\n \\n <p>The greatest differences in achieved values were observed across the different magnetic field vectors in the Position 1, ranging from 3.52 ± 0.1 g (caudal plane) to 15.15 ± 0.05 g (cranial plane) at 0.08 Tesla (T) field strength (<i>p</i> < 0.001), and from 4.10 ± 0.06 g (caudal) to 15.01 ± 0.07 g (cranial) at 0.1 T, <i>p</i> < 0.001. Differences in other vectors reached approximately 20%.</p>\\n \\n <p>The highest CF values were obtained in Position 1, intermediate values in Position 2, and the lowest in Position 3. An exception was the transverse vector, where, particularly with a magnetic field of 0.1 T, more similar values were observed across Positions 1–3, with respective values of 8.61 ± 0.14 g, 9.36 ± 0.06 g, and 8.31 ± 0.05 g.</p>\\n \\n <p>A stronger magnetic field (0.1 T compared to 0.08 T) resulted in higher CF values, especially during measurements in the transverse vector. This effect was most pronounced in the most extended catheter from the sheath - Position 3 (with respective values of 4.54 ± 0.09 g vs. 8.31 ± 0.05 g, <i>p</i> < 0.001). In the sagittal, cranial, and caudal vectors, the differences were less noticeable.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Different magnetic field vectors, catheter extensions from the sheath, and magnetic field strengths result in varying contact force values. For effective radiofrequency ablation lesions, these factors should be considered alongside power, duration, and other established parameters.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15178,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology\",\"volume\":\"36 4\",\"pages\":\"855-862\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jce.16597\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jce.16597","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导读:机器人磁导航(RMN)系统中导管与组织接触的稳定性是区分该系统与手动引导导管的关键特征之一。大量研究表明,在手动控制的导管中,接触力(CF)与应用时间或功率一样,对于形成最佳病变至关重要。RMN系统中使用的导管缺乏术中该参数监测的定量方法。我们的研究旨在部分解决这一科学知识上的差距。方法:我们使用RMN系统(Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA)、一个磁引导的8fr射频消融导管(THERMOCOOL RMT导管,Biosense Webster, Irvine, CA, USA)插入一个长护套(SR0, Abbott Cardiovascular, Nathan Lane North, Plymouth, MN, USA)和一个精密的jewelry scale (IKEME,广东,CN)进行了总共1200次CF测量。我们分析了四种不同的磁场矢量(横向、矢状、尾状和颅面)、两种磁场强度(0.1T和0.08T)和三种从长鞘延伸的导管配置(位置1伸展最少,位置3伸展最多)对所获得的CF值的影响。结果:接触力值在不同的磁场矢量、磁场强度和导管从血管鞘延伸时变化显著。在0.08 Tesla (T)场强下,位置1不同磁场矢量的接触力值差异最大,从3.52±0.1 g(尾侧)到15.15±0.05 g(颅面)(p)。结论:不同的磁场矢量、导管鞘外延伸和磁场强度导致接触力值不同。对于有效的射频消融病变,这些因素应与功率、持续时间和其他既定参数一起考虑。
Factors Influencing Contact Force in Robotic Magnetic Navigation Ablation
Introduction
Stability of catheter-tissue contact in the robotic magnetic navigation (RMN) system is one of the key features that distinguishes this system from manually guided catheters. Numerous studies have shown that contact force (CF) in manually controlled catheters is as crucial for forming an optimal lesion as the duration of application or power. Catheters used in the RMN system lack a quantitative method for intraoperative monitoring of this parameter. Our study aims to partially address this gap in scientific knowledge.
Methods
We conducted a total of 1200 CF measurements using the RMN system (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA), a magnetic-guided 8 Fr RF ablation catheter (THERMOCOOL RMT Catheter, Biosense Webster, Irvine, CA, USA) inserted through a long sheath (SR0, Abbott Cardiovascular, Nathan Lane North, Plymouth, MN, USA), and a precision jewelry scale (IKEME, Guangdong, CN). We analyzed the impact on the obtained CF values of four different magnetic field vectors (transverse, sagittal, caudal, and cranial), two field strengths (0.1T and 0.08T), and three catheter extension configurations from the long sheath (with Position 1 being the least extended and Position 3 the most extended).
Results
The contact force values varied significantly across the different magnetic field vectors, field strengths, and catheter extensions from the vascular sheath.
The greatest differences in achieved values were observed across the different magnetic field vectors in the Position 1, ranging from 3.52 ± 0.1 g (caudal plane) to 15.15 ± 0.05 g (cranial plane) at 0.08 Tesla (T) field strength (p < 0.001), and from 4.10 ± 0.06 g (caudal) to 15.01 ± 0.07 g (cranial) at 0.1 T, p < 0.001. Differences in other vectors reached approximately 20%.
The highest CF values were obtained in Position 1, intermediate values in Position 2, and the lowest in Position 3. An exception was the transverse vector, where, particularly with a magnetic field of 0.1 T, more similar values were observed across Positions 1–3, with respective values of 8.61 ± 0.14 g, 9.36 ± 0.06 g, and 8.31 ± 0.05 g.
A stronger magnetic field (0.1 T compared to 0.08 T) resulted in higher CF values, especially during measurements in the transverse vector. This effect was most pronounced in the most extended catheter from the sheath - Position 3 (with respective values of 4.54 ± 0.09 g vs. 8.31 ± 0.05 g, p < 0.001). In the sagittal, cranial, and caudal vectors, the differences were less noticeable.
Conclusion
Different magnetic field vectors, catheter extensions from the sheath, and magnetic field strengths result in varying contact force values. For effective radiofrequency ablation lesions, these factors should be considered alongside power, duration, and other established parameters.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology (JCE) keeps its readership well informed of the latest developments in the study and management of arrhythmic disorders. Edited by Bradley P. Knight, M.D., and a distinguished international editorial board, JCE is the leading journal devoted to the study of the electrophysiology of the heart.