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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |