Key result
Electroanatomic imaging (CARTO) for catheter ablation yielded similar acute procedural success to conventional mapping (91.5% vs 92.7%, P>0.5) but significantly reduced fluoroscopy time and radiation.
Why the study?
Does electroanatomic imaging (CARTO) reduce radiation exposure and improve outcomes compared to conventional fluoroscopic mapping in patients undergoing catheter ablation?
Population
102 unselected patients referred for catheter ablation (excluding complete AV nodal ablation)
Comparison
Electroanatomic imaging for mapping and ablation vs Conventional fluoroscopically guided activation…
Design
RCT, Prospectively randomized
Authors
Loading...
Supports routine CARTO adoption to minimize radiation in ablation; confirms equivalent efficacy with safety gains in RCTs.
RCT (n=102)
Randomized
Does electroanatomic imaging (CARTO) reduce radiation exposure and improve outcomes compared to conventional fluoroscopic mapping in patients undergoing catheter ablation?
Absolute Event Rate: 91.5% vs 92.7%
p-value: p=> 0.5
Routine use of electroanatomic mapping (CARTO) for catheter ablation drastically reduces fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure without compromising procedural success or duration.
Sporton et al. (2004) conducted an RCT in Catheter ablation (n=102). Electroanatomic imaging (CARTO) vs. Conventional fluoroscopically guided activation mapping was evaluated on Acute procedural success (p=> 0.5). Electroanatomic imaging (CARTO) for catheter ablation yielded similar acute procedural success to conventional mapping (91.5% vs 92.7%, P>0.5) but significantly reduced fluoroscopy time and radiation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: