Cargando…

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?

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Choi, Min Seok, Oh, Yong-Seog, Jang, Sung Won, Kim, Ji Hoon, Shin, Woo Seung, Youn, Ho-Joong, Jung, Wook Sung, Lee, Man Young, Seong, Ki Bae
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Cardiology 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3116102/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21731565
http://dx.doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2011.41.5.248
_version_ 1782206216503558144
author Choi, Min Seok
Oh, Yong-Seog
Jang, Sung Won
Kim, Ji Hoon
Shin, Woo Seung
Youn, Ho-Joong
Jung, Wook Sung
Lee, Man Young
Seong, Ki Bae
author_facet Choi, Min Seok
Oh, Yong-Seog
Jang, Sung Won
Kim, Ji Hoon
Shin, Woo Seung
Youn, Ho-Joong
Jung, Wook Sung
Lee, Man Young
Seong, Ki Bae
author_sort Choi, Min Seok
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3116102
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher The Korean Society of Cardiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31161022011-06-30 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? Choi, Min Seok Oh, Yong-Seog Jang, Sung Won Kim, Ji Hoon Shin, Woo Seung Youn, Ho-Joong Jung, Wook Sung Lee, Man Young Seong, Ki Bae Korean Circ J Original Article 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. The Korean Society of Cardiology 2011-05 2011-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC3116102/ /pubmed/21731565 http://dx.doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2011.41.5.248 Text en Copyright © 2011 The Korean Society of Cardiology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Choi, Min Seok
Oh, Yong-Seog
Jang, Sung Won
Kim, Ji Hoon
Shin, Woo Seung
Youn, Ho-Joong
Jung, Wook Sung
Lee, Man Young
Seong, Ki Bae
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?
title 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?
title_full 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?
title_fullStr 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?
title_full_unstemmed 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?
title_short 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?
title_sort 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?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3116102/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21731565
http://dx.doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2011.41.5.248
work_keys_str_mv AT choiminseok comparisonofmagneticnavigationsystemandconventionalmethodincatheterablationofatrialfibrillationismagneticnavigationsystemismoreeffectiveandsaferthanconventionalmethod
AT ohyongseog comparisonofmagneticnavigationsystemandconventionalmethodincatheterablationofatrialfibrillationismagneticnavigationsystemismoreeffectiveandsaferthanconventionalmethod
AT jangsungwon comparisonofmagneticnavigationsystemandconventionalmethodincatheterablationofatrialfibrillationismagneticnavigationsystemismoreeffectiveandsaferthanconventionalmethod
AT kimjihoon comparisonofmagneticnavigationsystemandconventionalmethodincatheterablationofatrialfibrillationismagneticnavigationsystemismoreeffectiveandsaferthanconventionalmethod
AT shinwooseung comparisonofmagneticnavigationsystemandconventionalmethodincatheterablationofatrialfibrillationismagneticnavigationsystemismoreeffectiveandsaferthanconventionalmethod
AT younhojoong comparisonofmagneticnavigationsystemandconventionalmethodincatheterablationofatrialfibrillationismagneticnavigationsystemismoreeffectiveandsaferthanconventionalmethod
AT jungwooksung comparisonofmagneticnavigationsystemandconventionalmethodincatheterablationofatrialfibrillationismagneticnavigationsystemismoreeffectiveandsaferthanconventionalmethod
AT leemanyoung comparisonofmagneticnavigationsystemandconventionalmethodincatheterablationofatrialfibrillationismagneticnavigationsystemismoreeffectiveandsaferthanconventionalmethod
AT seongkibae comparisonofmagneticnavigationsystemandconventionalmethodincatheterablationofatrialfibrillationismagneticnavigationsystemismoreeffectiveandsaferthanconventionalmethod