{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030131826741996232, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.82051282051282, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of contact force and remote magnetic navigation on lesion formation for the ablation of atrial fibrillation

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the method of choice for the treatment of drug‐resistant atrial fibrillation (AF). However, arrhythmia recurrences are frequent due to suboptimal lesions formation and pulmonary vein reconnection. Contact force (CF)‐ and remote magnetic navigation (RMN)‐guided catheters are both capable of improving contact and energy transfer to the tissue, possibly improving PVI outcome.