Loading…
Comparing learning curves of two established “single-shot” devices for ablation of atrial fibrillation
Purpose We compared the contour of learning curves of two “single-shot” devices used for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for safety and procedural data. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis comparing the first 60 PVI performed at our center using a pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) arr...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology 2018-12, Vol.53 (3), p.317-322 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-b1151d2c762ebdcd4e0d5ad6c26e9d4195ecbe67a558de2e74979dd8a942d9bd3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-b1151d2c762ebdcd4e0d5ad6c26e9d4195ecbe67a558de2e74979dd8a942d9bd3 |
container_end_page | 322 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 317 |
container_title | Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology |
container_volume | 53 |
creator | Leitz, Patrick Mönnig, G. Güner, F. Dechering, D. G. Wasmer, K. Reinke, F. Lange, Philipp S. Eckardt, L. Frommeyer, G. |
description | Purpose
We compared the contour of learning curves of two “single-shot” devices used for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for safety and procedural data.
Methods
We performed a retrospective analysis comparing the first 60 PVI performed at our center using a pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) array (39 male, mean age 57 years, 42 paroxysmal AF) to the first 60 first PVI using the Cryoballoon (44 male, mean age 59 years, 22 paroxysmal AF). Both groups were further divided into tertiles, where T1 regroups the first 20 ablations, T2 the following 20, and T3 the last 20 ablations.
Results
The mean total procedure time was reduced by 24 min between T1 and T3 for the PVAC and 15 min for the Cryoballoon (
p
= 0.01). Fluoroscopy increased by 5 min, total ablation time was reduced by 7 min for PVAC (
p
= 0.02), and both times decreased respectively by 7 and 1 min for the Cryoballoon (
p
= ns). In the PVAC group, a mean rate of 0.16 (T1:
n
= 5; T2:
n
= 2; T3:
n
= 3) complications was observed while a rate of 0.16 (T1:
n
= 2; T2:
n
= 3; T3:
n
= 4) occurred in the CRYO group (
p
= ns). Severe complications defined as stroke, pericardial tamponade with need of pericardiocentesis and phrenic nerve palsy occurred in
n
= 4 in both groups (6.6%).
Conclusions
With either of the systems, no significant differences in the effect of the learning curve on the occurrence of adverse events were observed. However, the PVAC array seemed to have a steeper learning curve for procedure, as well as fluoroscopy time. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10840-018-0361-z |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2028952772</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2028952772</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-b1151d2c762ebdcd4e0d5ad6c26e9d4195ecbe67a558de2e74979dd8a942d9bd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc9KHTEUxkOx1H99gG5kwE030SQzmSRLubRWENxYcBcyyZmay9zJNZlR6soH0Ze7T9IMc6sguMoh_L7vfJwPoW-UnFBCxGmiRFYEEyoxKWuKHz-hPcoFw5IrvpPnUpZYCn6zi_ZTWhJCFGH1F7TLVC0UlXwPLRdhtTbR93-KDkzsp8GO8R5SEdpieAgFpME0nU-34IrN03PKRAc43YZh8_RSOLj3NsNtiEXGzOBDPynNEL3pitY30Xfz9yH63Jouwdfte4B-__xxvfiFL6_OLxZnl9hWpRxwQymnjllRM2icdRUQx42rLatBuYoqDraBWhjOpQMGolJCOSeNqphTjSsP0PfZdx3D3Zjj65VPFnKKHsKYNCNMKs6EYBk9focuwxj7nG6ihFK1lFWm6EzZGFKK0Op19CsT_2pK9FSEnovQuQg9FaEfs-Zo6zw2K3Cviv-XzwCbgbSerg_xbfXHrv8ASLGXvQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2027996884</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparing learning curves of two established “single-shot” devices for ablation of atrial fibrillation</title><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Leitz, Patrick ; Mönnig, G. ; Güner, F. ; Dechering, D. G. ; Wasmer, K. ; Reinke, F. ; Lange, Philipp S. ; Eckardt, L. ; Frommeyer, G.</creator><creatorcontrib>Leitz, Patrick ; Mönnig, G. ; Güner, F. ; Dechering, D. G. ; Wasmer, K. ; Reinke, F. ; Lange, Philipp S. ; Eckardt, L. ; Frommeyer, G.</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
We compared the contour of learning curves of two “single-shot” devices used for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for safety and procedural data.
Methods
We performed a retrospective analysis comparing the first 60 PVI performed at our center using a pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) array (39 male, mean age 57 years, 42 paroxysmal AF) to the first 60 first PVI using the Cryoballoon (44 male, mean age 59 years, 22 paroxysmal AF). Both groups were further divided into tertiles, where T1 regroups the first 20 ablations, T2 the following 20, and T3 the last 20 ablations.
Results
The mean total procedure time was reduced by 24 min between T1 and T3 for the PVAC and 15 min for the Cryoballoon (
p
= 0.01). Fluoroscopy increased by 5 min, total ablation time was reduced by 7 min for PVAC (
p
= 0.02), and both times decreased respectively by 7 and 1 min for the Cryoballoon (
p
= ns). In the PVAC group, a mean rate of 0.16 (T1:
n
= 5; T2:
n
= 2; T3:
n
= 3) complications was observed while a rate of 0.16 (T1:
n
= 2; T2:
n
= 3; T3:
n
= 4) occurred in the CRYO group (
p
= ns). Severe complications defined as stroke, pericardial tamponade with need of pericardiocentesis and phrenic nerve palsy occurred in
n
= 4 in both groups (6.6%).
Conclusions
With either of the systems, no significant differences in the effect of the learning curve on the occurrence of adverse events were observed. However, the PVAC array seemed to have a steeper learning curve for procedure, as well as fluoroscopy time.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1383-875X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-8595</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10840-018-0361-z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29679185</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Ablation ; Atrial Fibrillation - surgery ; Cardiology ; Catheter Ablation - adverse effects ; Catheter Ablation - instrumentation ; Catheter Ablation - methods ; Complications ; Cryosurgery - adverse effects ; Cryosurgery - instrumentation ; Cryosurgery - methods ; Equipment Design ; Female ; Fibrillation ; Fluoroscopy ; Humans ; Learning ; Learning Curve ; Learning curves ; Male ; Medical instruments ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care) ; Paralysis ; Phrenic nerve ; Polyvinyl acetates ; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology ; Postoperative Complications - etiology ; Pulmonary Veins - surgery ; Retrospective Studies ; Tamponade ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology, 2018-12, Vol.53 (3), p.317-322</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018</rights><rights>Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-b1151d2c762ebdcd4e0d5ad6c26e9d4195ecbe67a558de2e74979dd8a942d9bd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-b1151d2c762ebdcd4e0d5ad6c26e9d4195ecbe67a558de2e74979dd8a942d9bd3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4339-9077</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29679185$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Leitz, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mönnig, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Güner, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dechering, D. G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wasmer, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reinke, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lange, Philipp S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eckardt, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frommeyer, G.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparing learning curves of two established “single-shot” devices for ablation of atrial fibrillation</title><title>Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology</title><addtitle>J Interv Card Electrophysiol</addtitle><addtitle>J Interv Card Electrophysiol</addtitle><description>Purpose
We compared the contour of learning curves of two “single-shot” devices used for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for safety and procedural data.
Methods
We performed a retrospective analysis comparing the first 60 PVI performed at our center using a pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) array (39 male, mean age 57 years, 42 paroxysmal AF) to the first 60 first PVI using the Cryoballoon (44 male, mean age 59 years, 22 paroxysmal AF). Both groups were further divided into tertiles, where T1 regroups the first 20 ablations, T2 the following 20, and T3 the last 20 ablations.
Results
The mean total procedure time was reduced by 24 min between T1 and T3 for the PVAC and 15 min for the Cryoballoon (
p
= 0.01). Fluoroscopy increased by 5 min, total ablation time was reduced by 7 min for PVAC (
p
= 0.02), and both times decreased respectively by 7 and 1 min for the Cryoballoon (
p
= ns). In the PVAC group, a mean rate of 0.16 (T1:
n
= 5; T2:
n
= 2; T3:
n
= 3) complications was observed while a rate of 0.16 (T1:
n
= 2; T2:
n
= 3; T3:
n
= 4) occurred in the CRYO group (
p
= ns). Severe complications defined as stroke, pericardial tamponade with need of pericardiocentesis and phrenic nerve palsy occurred in
n
= 4 in both groups (6.6%).
Conclusions
With either of the systems, no significant differences in the effect of the learning curve on the occurrence of adverse events were observed. However, the PVAC array seemed to have a steeper learning curve for procedure, as well as fluoroscopy time.</description><subject>Ablation</subject><subject>Atrial Fibrillation - surgery</subject><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>Catheter Ablation - adverse effects</subject><subject>Catheter Ablation - instrumentation</subject><subject>Catheter Ablation - methods</subject><subject>Complications</subject><subject>Cryosurgery - adverse effects</subject><subject>Cryosurgery - instrumentation</subject><subject>Cryosurgery - methods</subject><subject>Equipment Design</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fibrillation</subject><subject>Fluoroscopy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Learning Curve</subject><subject>Learning curves</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical instruments</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)</subject><subject>Paralysis</subject><subject>Phrenic nerve</subject><subject>Polyvinyl acetates</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - etiology</subject><subject>Pulmonary Veins - surgery</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Tamponade</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1383-875X</issn><issn>1572-8595</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kc9KHTEUxkOx1H99gG5kwE030SQzmSRLubRWENxYcBcyyZmay9zJNZlR6soH0Ze7T9IMc6sguMoh_L7vfJwPoW-UnFBCxGmiRFYEEyoxKWuKHz-hPcoFw5IrvpPnUpZYCn6zi_ZTWhJCFGH1F7TLVC0UlXwPLRdhtTbR93-KDkzsp8GO8R5SEdpieAgFpME0nU-34IrN03PKRAc43YZh8_RSOLj3NsNtiEXGzOBDPynNEL3pitY30Xfz9yH63Jouwdfte4B-__xxvfiFL6_OLxZnl9hWpRxwQymnjllRM2icdRUQx42rLatBuYoqDraBWhjOpQMGolJCOSeNqphTjSsP0PfZdx3D3Zjj65VPFnKKHsKYNCNMKs6EYBk9focuwxj7nG6ihFK1lFWm6EzZGFKK0Op19CsT_2pK9FSEnovQuQg9FaEfs-Zo6zw2K3Cviv-XzwCbgbSerg_xbfXHrv8ASLGXvQ</recordid><startdate>20181201</startdate><enddate>20181201</enddate><creator>Leitz, Patrick</creator><creator>Mönnig, G.</creator><creator>Güner, F.</creator><creator>Dechering, D. G.</creator><creator>Wasmer, K.</creator><creator>Reinke, F.</creator><creator>Lange, Philipp S.</creator><creator>Eckardt, L.</creator><creator>Frommeyer, G.</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4339-9077</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20181201</creationdate><title>Comparing learning curves of two established “single-shot” devices for ablation of atrial fibrillation</title><author>Leitz, Patrick ; Mönnig, G. ; Güner, F. ; Dechering, D. G. ; Wasmer, K. ; Reinke, F. ; Lange, Philipp S. ; Eckardt, L. ; Frommeyer, G.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-b1151d2c762ebdcd4e0d5ad6c26e9d4195ecbe67a558de2e74979dd8a942d9bd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Ablation</topic><topic>Atrial Fibrillation - surgery</topic><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>Catheter Ablation - adverse effects</topic><topic>Catheter Ablation - instrumentation</topic><topic>Catheter Ablation - methods</topic><topic>Complications</topic><topic>Cryosurgery - adverse effects</topic><topic>Cryosurgery - instrumentation</topic><topic>Cryosurgery - methods</topic><topic>Equipment Design</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fibrillation</topic><topic>Fluoroscopy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Learning Curve</topic><topic>Learning curves</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical instruments</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)</topic><topic>Paralysis</topic><topic>Phrenic nerve</topic><topic>Polyvinyl acetates</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - etiology</topic><topic>Pulmonary Veins - surgery</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Tamponade</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Leitz, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mönnig, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Güner, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dechering, D. G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wasmer, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reinke, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lange, Philipp S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eckardt, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frommeyer, G.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Leitz, Patrick</au><au>Mönnig, G.</au><au>Güner, F.</au><au>Dechering, D. G.</au><au>Wasmer, K.</au><au>Reinke, F.</au><au>Lange, Philipp S.</au><au>Eckardt, L.</au><au>Frommeyer, G.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparing learning curves of two established “single-shot” devices for ablation of atrial fibrillation</atitle><jtitle>Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology</jtitle><stitle>J Interv Card Electrophysiol</stitle><addtitle>J Interv Card Electrophysiol</addtitle><date>2018-12-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>53</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>317</spage><epage>322</epage><pages>317-322</pages><issn>1383-875X</issn><eissn>1572-8595</eissn><abstract>Purpose
We compared the contour of learning curves of two “single-shot” devices used for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for safety and procedural data.
Methods
We performed a retrospective analysis comparing the first 60 PVI performed at our center using a pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) array (39 male, mean age 57 years, 42 paroxysmal AF) to the first 60 first PVI using the Cryoballoon (44 male, mean age 59 years, 22 paroxysmal AF). Both groups were further divided into tertiles, where T1 regroups the first 20 ablations, T2 the following 20, and T3 the last 20 ablations.
Results
The mean total procedure time was reduced by 24 min between T1 and T3 for the PVAC and 15 min for the Cryoballoon (
p
= 0.01). Fluoroscopy increased by 5 min, total ablation time was reduced by 7 min for PVAC (
p
= 0.02), and both times decreased respectively by 7 and 1 min for the Cryoballoon (
p
= ns). In the PVAC group, a mean rate of 0.16 (T1:
n
= 5; T2:
n
= 2; T3:
n
= 3) complications was observed while a rate of 0.16 (T1:
n
= 2; T2:
n
= 3; T3:
n
= 4) occurred in the CRYO group (
p
= ns). Severe complications defined as stroke, pericardial tamponade with need of pericardiocentesis and phrenic nerve palsy occurred in
n
= 4 in both groups (6.6%).
Conclusions
With either of the systems, no significant differences in the effect of the learning curve on the occurrence of adverse events were observed. However, the PVAC array seemed to have a steeper learning curve for procedure, as well as fluoroscopy time.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>29679185</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10840-018-0361-z</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4339-9077</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1383-875X |
ispartof | Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology, 2018-12, Vol.53 (3), p.317-322 |
issn | 1383-875X 1572-8595 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2028952772 |
source | Springer Nature |
subjects | Ablation Atrial Fibrillation - surgery Cardiology Catheter Ablation - adverse effects Catheter Ablation - instrumentation Catheter Ablation - methods Complications Cryosurgery - adverse effects Cryosurgery - instrumentation Cryosurgery - methods Equipment Design Female Fibrillation Fluoroscopy Humans Learning Learning Curve Learning curves Male Medical instruments Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care) Paralysis Phrenic nerve Polyvinyl acetates Postoperative Complications - epidemiology Postoperative Complications - etiology Pulmonary Veins - surgery Retrospective Studies Tamponade Time Factors |
title | Comparing learning curves of two established “single-shot” devices for ablation of atrial fibrillation |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T17%3A33%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparing%20learning%20curves%20of%20two%20established%20%E2%80%9Csingle-shot%E2%80%9D%20devices%20for%20ablation%20of%20atrial%20fibrillation&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20interventional%20cardiac%20electrophysiology&rft.au=Leitz,%20Patrick&rft.date=2018-12-01&rft.volume=53&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=317&rft.epage=322&rft.pages=317-322&rft.issn=1383-875X&rft.eissn=1572-8595&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10840-018-0361-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2028952772%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-b1151d2c762ebdcd4e0d5ad6c26e9d4195ecbe67a558de2e74979dd8a942d9bd3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2027996884&rft_id=info:pmid/29679185&rfr_iscdi=true |