{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,2]],"date-time":"2026-10-02T09:49:50Z","timestamp":1790934590787,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2003,8,12]],"date-time":"2003-08-12T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1060646400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":315,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Cardiovasc electrophysiol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2002,10]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>\n                    <jats:bold>Cooled\u2010Tip vs 8\u2010mm\u2010Tip Ablation of Atrial Flutter.<\/jats:bold>\n                    <jats:italic>Introduction<\/jats:italic>\n                    : Cooled\u2010tip and 8\u2010mm\u2010tip catheters have been found to be more effective than conventional 4\u2010mm\u2010tip catheters for radiofrequency (RF) ablation of common atrial flutter. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of cooled\u2010tip and 8\u2010mm\u2010tip catheters for flutter ablation in a randomized, prospective study.\n                  <\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>\n                    <jats:italic>Methods and Results<\/jats:italic>\n                    : In 100 consecutive patients referred for ablation of common atrial flutter, cavotricuspid ablation was performed with a closed cooled\u2010tip catheter (\n                    <jats:styled-content>n = 50<\/jats:styled-content>\n                    ) or an 8\u2010mm\u2010tip ablation catheter (\n                    <jats:styled-content>n = 50<\/jats:styled-content>\n                    ). RF current was applied for 60 to 120 seconds at powers of 40 to 50 W with the closed cooled\u2010tip catheter and in a temperature\u2010controlled mode (65\u00b0C\/70 W) with the 8\u2010mm\u2010tip catheter. The endpoint was achievement of a bidirectional isthmus conduction block. Cross\u2010over was performed after 15 unsuccessful RF applications for each of the catheters. Complete bidirectional isthmus block was achieved in 99% of patients. Cross\u2010over was performed in 11 patients after primary use of the cooled\u2010tip catheter and in 9 patients after primary ablation with the 8\u2010mm\u2010tip catheter. No significant differences were found in the procedure parameters, such as overall RF applications (\n                    <jats:styled-content>12.4 \u00b1 11.3 vs 12.9 \u00b1 8.6<\/jats:styled-content>\n                    ), ablation duration (\n                    <jats:styled-content>42 \u00b1 43 min vs 39 \u00b1 27 min<\/jats:styled-content>\n                    ), and fluoroscopy time (\n                    <jats:styled-content>17.0 \u00b1 18.7 min vs 15.7 \u00b1 10.7 min<\/jats:styled-content>\n                    ). In a mean follow\u2010up of 8.3 months, 1 patient in the cooled\u2010tip group and 3 patients in the 8\u2010mm\u2010tip group had recurrence of common atrial flutter.\n                  <\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>\n                    <jats:italic>Conclusion<\/jats:italic>\n                    : Use of the closed cooled\u2010tip ablation catheter and the 8\u2010mm\u2010tip catheter have equal and high efficacy for RF ablation of common atrial flutter.\n                  <\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1540-8167.2002.00980.x","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2004,12,26]],"date-time":"2004-12-26T15:17:50Z","timestamp":1104074270000},"page":"980-985","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":60,"title":["Prospective Randomized Comparison of Closed Cooled\u2010Tip versus 8\u2010mm\u2010Tip Catheters for Radiofrequency Ablation of Typical Atrial Flutter"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"13","author":[{"given":"JUERGEN","family":"SCHREIECK","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"BERNHARD","family":"ZRENNER","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"JOHANNA","family":"KUMPMANN","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"GJIN","family":"NDREPEPA","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"MICHAEL A.E.","family":"SCHNEIDER","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"ISABEL","family":"DEISENHOFER","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"CLAUS","family":"SCHMITT","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2003,8,12]]},"container-title":["Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1046%2Fj.1540-8167.2002.00980.x","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1046\/j.1540-8167.2002.00980.x","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,11,17]],"date-time":"2023-11-17T19:36:11Z","timestamp":1700249771000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1046\/j.1540-8167.2002.00980.x"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2002,10]]},"references-count":0,"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2002,10]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1046\/j.1540-8167.2002.00980.x"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1046\/j.1540-8167.2002.00980.x","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["1045-3873","1540-8167"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1045-3873","type":"print"},{"value":"1540-8167","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2002,10]]}}}