References
1. Raymond-Paquin A, Andrade J, Macle L. Catheter ablation: an ongoing revolution. J Thorac Dis. 2019;11(S3):S212-S215. doi:10.21037/jtd.2019.02.20
2. Kugler JD, Danford DA, Houston KA, Felix G. Pediatric Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation Registry Success, Fluoroscopy Time, and Complication Rate for Supraventricular Tachycardia: Comparison of Early and Recent Eras. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2002;13(4):336-341. doi:10.1046/j.1540-8167.2002.00336.x
3. Van Hare GF, Javitz H, Carmelli D, et al. Prospective Assessment after Pediatric Cardiac Ablation: Demographics, Medical Profiles, and Initial Outcomes. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2004;15(7):759-770. doi:10.1046/j.1540-8167.2004.03645.x
4. Pilcher TA, Saarel EV. Anatomic Challenges In Pediatric Catheter Ablation. J Atr Fibrillation. Published online August 31, 2014. doi:10.4022/jafib.1054
5. Van Hare GF, Colan SD, Javitz H, et al. Prospective assessment after pediatric cardiac ablation: Fate of intracardiac structure and function, as assessed by serial echocardiography. American Heart Journal. 2007;153(5):815-820.e6. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2007.02.009
6. Friedman RA, Walsh EP, Silka MJ, et al. NASPE Expert Consensus Conference: Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation in Children with and without Congenital Heart Disease. Report of the Writing Committee. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. 2002;25(6):1000-1017. doi:10.1046/j.1460-9592.2002.01000.x
7. Cappato R, Calkins H, Chen SA, et al. Updated Worldwide Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety of Catheter Ablation for Human Atrial Fibrillation. Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology. 2010;3(1):32-38. doi:10.1161/CIRCEP.109.859116
8. Bertaglia E, Zoppo F, Tondo C, et al. Early complications of pulmonary vein catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: A multicenter prospective registry on procedural safety. Heart Rhythm. 2007;4(10):1265-1271. doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.06.016
9. Bohnen M, Stevenson WG, Tedrow UB, et al. Incidence and predictors of major complications from contemporary catheter ablation to treat cardiac arrhythmias. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8(11):1661-1666. doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2011.05.017
10. Allen DG, Lamb GD, Westerblad H. Skeletal Muscle Fatigue: Cellular Mechanisms. Physiological Reviews. 2008;88(1):287-332. doi:10.1152/physrev.00015.2007
11. Constantinescu MA, Lee SL, Ernst S, Hemakom A, Mandic D, Yang GZ. Probabilistic guidance for catheter tip motion in cardiac ablation procedures. Medical Image Analysis. 2018;47:1-14. doi:10.1016/j.media.2018.03.008
12. Aizer A, Qiu JK, Cheng AV, et al. Rapid pacing and high‐frequency jet ventilation additively improve catheter stability during atrial fibrillation ablation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020;31(7):1678-1686. doi:10.1111/jce.14507
13. Davis DR, Tang ASL, Gollob MH, Lemery R, Green MS, Birnie DH. Remote Magnetic Navigation-Assisted Catheter Ablation Enhances Catheter Stability and Ablation Success with Lower Catheter Temperatures. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. 2008;31(7):893-898. doi:10.1111/j.1540-8159.2008.01105.x
14. Nguyen BL, Electrophysiology Section, Heart and Great Vessels Department, Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Merino JL, Arrhythmia-Electrophysiology Research Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Gang ES, Electrophysiology Section, Division of Cardiology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, Cardiovascular Research Foundation, 414 North Camden Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90210, US. E:
gang@cvmg.com. Remote Navigation for Ablation Procedures – A New Step Forward in the Treatment of Cardiac Arrhythmias.
European Cardiology Review. 2010;6(3):50. doi:10.15420/ecr.2010.6.3.50
15. Kim AM, Turakhia M, Lu J, et al. Impact of Remote Magnetic Catheter Navigation on Ablation Fluoroscopy and Procedure Time. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. 2008;31(11):1399-1404. doi:10.1111/j.1540-8159.2008.01202.x
16. Mass PN, Kumthekar RN, Berul CI, Opfermann JD. A Novel Tool for Improved Control and Maneuverability in Pediatric Cardiac Catheter Ablation Procedures. In: 2020 Design of Medical Devices Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 2020:V001T01A006. doi:10.1115/DMD2020-9039
17. Mass PN, Contento JM, Opfermann JD, Sumihara K, Kumthekar RN, Berul CI. An Infant Phantom for Pediatric Pericardial Access and Electrophysiology Training. Heart Rhythm O2. Published online February 2022:S2666501822000563. doi:10.1016/j.hroo.2022.02.010
18. Hart SG, Staveland LE. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. In: Advances in Psychology. Vol 52. Elsevier; 1988:139-183. doi:10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9
19. Hart SG. Nasa-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX); 20 Years Later. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. 2006;50(9):904-908. doi:10.1177/154193120605000909
20. Ikeda A, Nakagawa H, Lambert H, et al. Relationship Between Catheter Contact Force and Radiofrequency Lesion Size and Incidence of Steam Pop in the Beating Canine Heart: Electrogram Amplitude, Impedance, and Electrode Temperature Are Poor Predictors of Electrode-Tissue Contact Force and Lesion Size. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014;7(6):1174-1180. doi:10.1161/CIRCEP.113.001094
21. Hosseini SM, Rozen G, Saleh A, et al. Catheter Ablation for Cardiac Arrhythmias. JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology. 2017;3(11):1240-1248. doi:10.1016/j.jacep.2017.05.005
22. Rajappan K, Baker V, Richmond L, et al. A randomized trial to compare atrial fibrillation ablation using a steerable vs. a non-steerable sheath. Europace. 2009;11(5):571-575. doi:10.1093/europace/eup069