2026-10-13T10:42:10Z https://api.figshare.com/v2/oai

oai:figshare.com:article/34015612 2026-09-28T17:23:55Z category_1 category_7 category_8 category_12 category_15 category_21 category_24 category_734 category_61 category_64 category_132 portal_5 item_type_3 month_year_09_2026

<p>Figure 2. Length of the sheath support – three different lengths of the free catheter tip (distance from the end of the sheath to the catheter tip: 3,5 cm, 7 cm and 14 cm).</p> Zdenek Starek (9724613) Filip Souček (25132525) Martin Pešl (3161751) Martin Folprecht (25132528) Biophysics Medicine Microbiology Cell Biology Neuroscience Biotechnology Evolutionary Biology Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified Developmental Biology Cancer Infectious Diseases magnetic field intensities magic &# 8482 greater sheath support external magnetic field enhanced sheath support contact force increased measure cf using navigate catheters inside stereotaxis rmn system system uses cf increased xlink "> vitro model study compared perpendicular orientation permanent magnets navistar rmt dedicated frame celsius rmt arrhythmia ablation 89 ), 38 ). 36 ). <p>A shorter free tip (3.5 cm) corresponds to greater sheath support and higher achievable contact force; a longer free tip (14 cm) provides less support and lower contact force. These three configurations were tested for all four catheters across all magnetic field intensities. Figure 6. Effect of different sheath supports on the maximum achievable contact force for individual catheters, A – Celsius; B – Navistar; C – MAGiC™; D – Magnoflush. Shorter free catheter tip length (3.5 cm, left) consistently produced significantly higher contact force compared with 7 cm and 14 cm (red brackets). This effect was observed at all three magnetic field intensities and for all four catheters. Box plots show median and interquartile range. Figure 7. Effect of changing the magnetic field intensity on the maximum achievable contact force for individual sheath support values. Each panel shows results at a fixed free catheter tip length: A – 3.5 cm (maximum sheath support); B – 7 cm; C – 14 cm (minimum sheath support). Within each panel, contact force increased with higher magnetic field intensity for most catheter–sheath combinations. Magnoflush achieved the highest overall contact force at 3.5 cm sheath support (up to 29.25 g). Box plots show median and interquartile range, A – 3,5 cm; B – 7 cm; C – 14 cm. Figure 8. Effect of different flow rates on the maximum achievable contact force at different values of magnetic field intensity. Results are shown for Navistar RMT (panels A–B), MAGiC™ (panels C–D), and Magnoflush (panel E) at 0.08 T and 0.10 T. No statistically significant differences were observed between flow rates of 2, 17, and 30 ml/min in any catheter or orientation, confirming that irrigation flow rate does not influence contact force under the conditions tested. Box plots show median and interquartile range. A – Navistar, perpendicular setting; B – Navistar, longitudinal setting; C – MAGiC™, perpendicular setting; D – MAGiC™, longitudinal setting; E – Magnoflush, longitudinal setting.</p> <p>(ZIP)</p> 2026-09-28T17:23:53Z Dataset Dataset 10.1371/journal.pone.0357588.s001 https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/_p_Figure_2_Length_of_the_sheath_support_three_different_lengths_of_the_free_catheter_tip_distance_from_the_end_of_the_sheath_to_the_catheter_tip_3_5_cm_7_cm_and_14_cm_p_/34015612 CC BY 4.0