机器人磁导航中MAGiC导管在不同磁场强度、矢量方向和导管延伸下接触力变化的评估。

IF 2.6
Michal Orczykowski, Maciej Bak, Andrzej Glowniak, Krzysztof Kaczmarek, Piotr Urbanek, Robert Bodalski, Krzysztof Dubowski, Anna Jargielo, Pawel Derejko, Pawel Ptaszynski, Lukasz Szumowski
{"title":"机器人磁导航中MAGiC导管在不同磁场强度、矢量方向和导管延伸下接触力变化的评估。","authors":"Michal Orczykowski, Maciej Bak, Andrzej Glowniak, Krzysztof Kaczmarek, Piotr Urbanek, Robert Bodalski, Krzysztof Dubowski, Anna Jargielo, Pawel Derejko, Pawel Ptaszynski, Lukasz Szumowski","doi":"10.1007/s10840-025-02092-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Contact force (CF) in manually controlled catheters is crucial for forming an optimal lesion. There is lack of published data on CF values of MAGiC catheter (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA) in magnetic field.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a total of 2500 CF measurements using the Robotic Magnetic Navigation (RMN) system (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA), a magnetic-guided 8,5 Fr RF ablation catheter MAGiC (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA) inserted through a long sheath, and a precision jewelry scale (IKEME, Guangdong, CN). We analyzed the impact on the obtained CF values of five different magnetic field vectors (transverse, caudal, cranial, sagittal, and anterior), two field strengths (0.1 T and 0.08 T), and five catheter extension configurations from the long sheath. Additionally, we compared the CF values of the MAGiC catheter and the THERMOCOOL® RMT Catheter (Biosense Webster, Irvine, CA, USA) using two models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The measured CF values of MAGiC catheter ranged from 5.62 to 21.61 g (0.1 T) and 3.63 to 20.74 g (0.08 T) and varied depending on the vectors. CF was higher at 0.1 T than 0.08 T, with values ranging from 9.32 to 21.61 g (0.1 T) and 8.71 to 20.74 g (0.08 T). In Model I comparison of MAGiC and THERMOCOOL® RMT, the MAGiC catheter had significantly higher CF (p < 0.001) in 28/30 measurements scenarios. In Model II, CF was higher in 24/30 scenarios (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The MAGiC catheter provides consistently optimal CF values across multiple orientations and catheter extension models, outperforming the THERMOCOOL® RMT Catheter in most scenarios.</p>","PeriodicalId":520675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of contact force variability in the MAGiC catheter under different magnetic field strengths, vector orientations, and catheter extensions in robotic magnetic navigation.\",\"authors\":\"Michal Orczykowski, Maciej Bak, Andrzej Glowniak, Krzysztof Kaczmarek, Piotr Urbanek, Robert Bodalski, Krzysztof Dubowski, Anna Jargielo, Pawel Derejko, Pawel Ptaszynski, Lukasz Szumowski\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10840-025-02092-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Contact force (CF) in manually controlled catheters is crucial for forming an optimal lesion. There is lack of published data on CF values of MAGiC catheter (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA) in magnetic field.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a total of 2500 CF measurements using the Robotic Magnetic Navigation (RMN) system (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA), a magnetic-guided 8,5 Fr RF ablation catheter MAGiC (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA) inserted through a long sheath, and a precision jewelry scale (IKEME, Guangdong, CN). We analyzed the impact on the obtained CF values of five different magnetic field vectors (transverse, caudal, cranial, sagittal, and anterior), two field strengths (0.1 T and 0.08 T), and five catheter extension configurations from the long sheath. Additionally, we compared the CF values of the MAGiC catheter and the THERMOCOOL® RMT Catheter (Biosense Webster, Irvine, CA, USA) using two models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The measured CF values of MAGiC catheter ranged from 5.62 to 21.61 g (0.1 T) and 3.63 to 20.74 g (0.08 T) and varied depending on the vectors. CF was higher at 0.1 T than 0.08 T, with values ranging from 9.32 to 21.61 g (0.1 T) and 8.71 to 20.74 g (0.08 T). In Model I comparison of MAGiC and THERMOCOOL® RMT, the MAGiC catheter had significantly higher CF (p < 0.001) in 28/30 measurements scenarios. In Model II, CF was higher in 24/30 scenarios (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The MAGiC catheter provides consistently optimal CF values across multiple orientations and catheter extension models, outperforming the THERMOCOOL® RMT Catheter in most scenarios.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-025-02092-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-025-02092-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人工控制导管的接触力(CF)对于形成最佳病变至关重要。MAGiC导管(Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA)在磁场中的CF值缺乏已发表的数据。方法:我们使用机器人磁导航(RMN)系统(Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA)、通过长护套插入的磁引导8,5 Fr射频消融导管MAGiC (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA)和精密珠宝称(IKEME,广东,CN)进行了总计2500 CF测量。我们分析了五种不同的磁场矢量(横、尾、颅、矢状和前)、两种磁场强度(0.1 T和0.08 T)和五种导管长鞘延伸配置对所获得的CF值的影响。此外,我们使用两种模型比较了MAGiC导管和THERMOCOOL®RMT导管(Biosense Webster, Irvine, CA, USA)的CF值。结果:MAGiC导管的CF值在5.62 ~ 21.61 g (0.1 T)和3.63 ~ 20.74 g (0.08 T)之间,随载体的不同而变化。CF在0.1 T时高于0.08 T,分别为9.32 ~ 21.61 g (0.1 T)和8.71 ~ 20.74 g (0.08 T)。在MAGiC和THERMOCOOL®RMT的模型I比较中,MAGiC导管的CF值显著高于THERMOCOOL®RMT (p)。结论:MAGiC导管在多个方向和导管延伸模型中提供一致的最佳CF值,在大多数情况下优于THERMOCOOL®RMT导管。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of contact force variability in the MAGiC catheter under different magnetic field strengths, vector orientations, and catheter extensions in robotic magnetic navigation.

Background: Contact force (CF) in manually controlled catheters is crucial for forming an optimal lesion. There is lack of published data on CF values of MAGiC catheter (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA) in magnetic field.

Methods: We conducted a total of 2500 CF measurements using the Robotic Magnetic Navigation (RMN) system (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA), a magnetic-guided 8,5 Fr RF ablation catheter MAGiC (Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MO, USA) inserted through a long sheath, and a precision jewelry scale (IKEME, Guangdong, CN). We analyzed the impact on the obtained CF values of five different magnetic field vectors (transverse, caudal, cranial, sagittal, and anterior), two field strengths (0.1 T and 0.08 T), and five catheter extension configurations from the long sheath. Additionally, we compared the CF values of the MAGiC catheter and the THERMOCOOL® RMT Catheter (Biosense Webster, Irvine, CA, USA) using two models.

Results: The measured CF values of MAGiC catheter ranged from 5.62 to 21.61 g (0.1 T) and 3.63 to 20.74 g (0.08 T) and varied depending on the vectors. CF was higher at 0.1 T than 0.08 T, with values ranging from 9.32 to 21.61 g (0.1 T) and 8.71 to 20.74 g (0.08 T). In Model I comparison of MAGiC and THERMOCOOL® RMT, the MAGiC catheter had significantly higher CF (p < 0.001) in 28/30 measurements scenarios. In Model II, CF was higher in 24/30 scenarios (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The MAGiC catheter provides consistently optimal CF values across multiple orientations and catheter extension models, outperforming the THERMOCOOL® RMT Catheter in most scenarios.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信