Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Journal of Cardiovas...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
Article . 2025 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Factors Influencing Contact Force in Robotic Magnetic Navigation Ablation

Authors: Michal Orczykowski; Maciej Bak; Krzysztof Kaczmarek; Piotr Urbanek; Bodalski Robert; Krzysztof Dubowski; Grzegorz Warminski; +5 Authors

Factors Influencing Contact Force in Robotic Magnetic Navigation Ablation

Abstract

ABSTRACTIntroductionStability 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.MethodsWe 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).ResultsThe 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.ConclusionDifferent 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.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Magnetic Fields, Robotic Surgical Procedures, Catheter Ablation, Humans, Equipment Design, Cardiac Catheters

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    2
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
2
Top 10%
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!