Comparison of magnetic navigation system and conventional method in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: is magnetic navigation system is more effective and safer than conventional method?

磁导航系统与传统方法在导管消融治疗房颤中的比较:磁导航系统是否比传统方法更有效、更安全?

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although there have been so many reports of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) with magnetic navigation system (MNS), it is not necessarily obvious that MNS is more effective than conventional ablation. We performed AF ablation with MNS and compared the clinical outcomes and radiofrequency ablation parameters with those of conventional ablation. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred eleven consecutive patients (conventional group, n=70 vs. MNS group, n=41) undergoing catheter ablation of AF were enrolled. We compared and analyzed the procedural parameters, namely fluoroscopic time, procedural time, acute procedural success and 3 months success rate of both groups. RESULTS: The MNS group was associated with slightly larger left atrial size (43.7±6.3 mm vs. 41.2±6.3 mm, p=0.04), significantly longer total procedure time (352±50 minutes vs. 283±75 minutes, p<0.0001), and shorter total fluoroscopic time (99±28 minutes vs. 238±45 minutes, p<0.0001) than the conventional group. The MNS and conventional group did not differ with respect to acute procedural success, AF recurrence, atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia recurrence, or total arrhythmia recurrence. While no complications were observed in the MNS group, eight cases of significant pericardial effusion occurred in the conventional group. CONCLUSION: The MNS system seems to be effective and safe in the catheter ablation of AF, particularly in the population of patients with persistent AF and slightly dilated left atria.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。