These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38189924)

  • 1. Contact force sensing manual catheter versus remote magnetic navigation ablation of atrial fibrillation: a single-center comparison.
    Schlögl S; Schlögl KS; Bengel P; Haarmann H; Bergau L; Rasenack E; Hasenfuss G; Zabel M
    Heart Vessels; 2024 May; 39(5):427-437. PubMed ID: 38189924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Remote magnetic navigation versus manual catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: A single center long-term comparison.
    Schlögl S; Schlögl KS; Haarmann H; Bengel P; Bergau L; Rasenack E; Hasenfuss G; Zabel M
    Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 2022 Jan; 45(1):14-22. PubMed ID: 34687054
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Efficacy and safety of remote magnetic catheter navigation vs. manual steerable sheath-guided ablation for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a case-control study.
    Koutalas E; Bertagnolli L; Sommer P; Richter S; Rolf S; Breithardt O; Bollmann A; Hindricks G; Arya A
    Europace; 2015 Feb; 17(2):232-8. PubMed ID: 25336662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A Comparison of Remote Magnetic Irrigated Tip Ablation versus Manual Catheter Irrigated Tip Catheter Ablation With and Without Force Sensing Feedback.
    Weiss JP; May HT; Bair TL; Crandall BG; Cutler MJ; Day JD; Osborn JS; Mallender C; Bunch TJ
    J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 2016 Mar; 27 Suppl 1():S5-S10. PubMed ID: 26969224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Radiofrequency atrial fibrillation ablation with irrigated tip catheter using remote magnetic navigation compared with conventional manual method.
    Ghadban R; Gifft K; Luebbering Z; Sodhi S; Cooper D; Enezate T
    J Interv Card Electrophysiol; 2021 Oct; 62(1):95-102. PubMed ID: 32959178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Remote magnetic versus manual catheter navigation for circumferential pulmonary vein ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation.
    Lüthje L; Vollmann D; Seegers J; Dorenkamp M; Sohns C; Hasenfuss G; Zabel M
    Clin Res Cardiol; 2011 Nov; 100(11):1003-11. PubMed ID: 21706198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Remote-controlled magnetic pulmonary vein isolation using a new three-dimensional non-fluoroscopic navigation system: a single-centre prospective study.
    Da Costa A; Ben H'dech M; Romeyer-Bouchard C; Bisch L; Gate-Martinet A; Levallois M; Isaaz K
    Arch Cardiovasc Dis; 2013; 106(8-9):423-32. PubMed ID: 23906679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Robotic magnetic navigation-guided catheter ablation establishes highly effective pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation when compared to conventional ablation techniques.
    Noten AME; Romanov A; De Schouwer K; Beloborodov V; Bhagwandien R; Hoogendijk MG; Mikheenko I; Wijchers S; Yap SC; Schwagten B; Szili-Torok T
    J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 2023 Dec; 34(12):2472-2483. PubMed ID: 37767745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Long-term outcomes of the current remote magnetic catheter navigation technique for ablation of atrial fibrillation.
    Yuan S; Holmqvist F; Kongstad O; Jensen SM; Wang L; Ljungström E; Hertervig E; Borgquist R
    Scand Cardiovasc J; 2017 Dec; 51(6):308-315. PubMed ID: 28958165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Remote magnetic navigation versus manual control navigation for atrial fibrillation ablation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Jia K; Jin Q; Liu A; Wu L
    J Electrocardiol; 2019; 55():78-86. PubMed ID: 31152995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: Electrical modification suggesting transmurality is faster achieved with remote magnetic catheter in comparison with contact force use.
    Bun SS; Ayari A; Latcu DG; Errahmouni A; Saoudi N
    J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 2017 Jul; 28(7):745-753. PubMed ID: 28419605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Initial experience of a novel mapping system combined with remote magnetic navigation in the catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation.
    Lin C; Pehrson S; Jacobsen PK; Chen X
    J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 2017 Dec; 28(12):1387-1392. PubMed ID: 28862806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Remote magnetic with open-irrigated catheter vs. manual navigation for ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Proietti R; Pecoraro V; Di Biase L; Natale A; Santangeli P; Viecca M; Sagone A; Galli A; Moja L; Tagliabue L
    Europace; 2013 Sep; 15(9):1241-8. PubMed ID: 23585253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Repeat catheter ablation for recurrent atrial fibrillation: Electrophysiologic findings and clinical outcomes.
    Daimee UA; Akhtar T; Boyle TA; Jager L; Arbab-Zadeh A; Marine JE; Berger RD; Calkins H; Spragg DD
    J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 2021 Mar; 32(3):628-638. PubMed ID: 33410561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of contact force and remote magnetic navigation on lesion formation for the ablation of atrial fibrillation.
    Grossi S; Grassi F; Galleani L; Bianchi F; Conte MR
    Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 2018 May; 41(5):450-458. PubMed ID: 29405314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of atrial fibrillation ablation efficacy using remote magnetic navigation vs. manual navigation with contact-force control.
    Jez J; Jadczyk T; Lehar F; Pesl M; Kulik T; Belaskova S; Soucek F; Caluori G; Wojakowski W; Starek Z
    Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub; 2020 Dec; 164(4):387-393. PubMed ID: 31645769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Impact of open-irrigated radiofrequency catheter with contact force measurement on the efficacy and safety of atrial fibrillation ablation: a single-center direct comparison.
    Schlögl S; Schlögl KS; Bengel P; Bergau L; Haarmann H; Rasenack E; Hasenfuss G; Zabel M
    J Interv Card Electrophysiol; 2022 Dec; 65(3):685-693. PubMed ID: 35907108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Efficacy and Safety of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Using Remote Magnetic Navigation: Experience from 1,006 Procedures.
    Jin QI; Pehrson S; Jacobsen PK; Chen XU
    J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 2016 Mar; 27 Suppl 1():S23-8. PubMed ID: 26969219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Feasibility and safety of remote-controlled magnetic navigation for ablation of atrial fibrillation.
    Katsiyiannis WT; Melby DP; Matelski JL; Ervin VL; Laverence KL; Gornick CC
    Am J Cardiol; 2008 Dec; 102(12):1674-6. PubMed ID: 19064022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Does a patent foramen ovale matter when using a remote-controlled magnetic system for pulmonary vein isolation?
    Gate-Martinet A; Da Costa A; Romeyer-Bouchard C; Bisch L; Levallois M; Isaaz K
    Arch Cardiovasc Dis; 2014 Feb; 107(2):88-95. PubMed ID: 24556188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.