Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 243

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparison of Electrode Cooling Between Internal and Open Irrigation in Radiofrequency Ablation Lesion Depth and Incidence of Thrombus and Steam Pop

Open access
Yokoyama, Katsuaki, Nakagawa, Hiroshi, Wittkampf, Fred H.M., Pitha, Jan V., Lazzara, Ralph, Jackman, Warren M.·2006·Circulation

Abstract

Background— Electrode cooling by circulating fluid within the electrode (closed loop) or open irrigation facilitates radiofrequency (RF) ablation. This study compared lesion parameters between closed loop and open irrigation with the use of a canine model. Methods and Results— In 8 anesthetized dogs, the skin over the thigh muscle was incised and raised, forming a cradle superfused with heparinized blood (activated clotting time >350 seconds) at 37°C. A 7F 4-mm closed loop electrode (irrigation 36 mL/min) and 7.5F 3.5-mm open irrigation electrode (irrigation 17 mL/min) were positioned perpendicular to the thigh muscle at 10 g contact weight. RF was applied (n=121) at 20 or 30 W for 60 seconds in low (0.1 m/s) or high (0.5 m/s) pulsatile blood flow. Temperatures were measured in the electrode, electrode-tissue interface, and within the tissue at 3- and 7-mm depths. After each RF, the cradle was emptied to examine the electrode and interface for thrombus. There was no difference between closed loop and open irrigation in impedance, lesion depth, or tissue temperature at 20 or 30 W. Interface temperature and electrode temperature were greater in the closed loop application. Thrombus occurred in 32 of 63 closed loop versus 0 of 58 open irrigation RF applications ( P <0.05) with interface temperature ≥80°C in all 32 (electrode temperature <40°C in 1, 40°C to 50°C in 26, and >50°C in 5). With closed loop, interface temperature and thrombus incidence were greater at 30 W and low blood flow. With open irrigation, interface temperature remained low (≤71°C) with no difference between 20 and 30 W or between low and high blood flow. Steam pop occurred at 20 W in 4 of 35 closed loop and 0 of 30 open irrigation and at 30 W in 15 of 28 closed loop and 4 of 28 open irrigation applications ( P <0.05). Conclusions— Lower interface temperature, thrombus, and steam pop, especially in low blood flow, indicate greater interface cooling with open irrigation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.105.540062

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 243

Metadata

Authors
Yokoyama, K., Nakagawa, H., Wittkampf, F. H. M., Pitha, J. V., Lazzara, R., & Jackman, W. M.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2006-01-03
Volume
113
Issue
1
Pages
11-19
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W1999367437
Cited by
243
References
0
FWCI
8.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of Electrode Cooling Between Internal and Open Irrigation in Radiofrequency Ablation Lesion Depth and Incidence of Thrombus and Steam Pop. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.105.540062
The paper
Yokoyama, K., Nakagawa, H., Wittkampf, F. H. M., Pitha, J. V., Lazzara, R., & Jackman, W. M. (2006). Comparison of Electrode Cooling Between Internal and Open Irrigation in Radiofrequency Ablation Lesion Depth and Incidence of Thrombus and Steam Pop. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.540062

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.