Key result
Third-generation quadripolar magnetic catheters are associated with ~92% accessory pathway ablation success versus first-generation devices.
Why the study?
The feasibility, safety, and efficacy of magnetic remote-controlled accessory pathway ablation needed to be evaluated.
Does magnetic remote-controlled catheter ablation safely and effectively treat accessory pathways, and do newer catheter generations improve procedural outcomes?
Observational (n=59)
Does magnetic remote-controlled catheter ablation safely and effectively treat accessory pathways, and do newer catheter generations improve procedural outcomes?
Absolute Event Rate: 92% vs 67%
Hypothesis-generating for remote magnetic AP ablation with quadripolar catheters; prospective trials needed before clinical adoption.
AIMS: This study evaluates feasibility, safety, and efficacy of magnetic remote-controlled accessory pathway (AP) ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: The novel magnetic navigation system (MNS) (Niobe, Stereotaxis) creates a steerable magnetic field (0.08 T) controlling the distal magnetic tip of an ablation catheter. In conjunction with a catheter advancer system (Cardiodrive, Stereotaxis) remote catheter ablation is enabled. Conventional electrophysiology study identified AP conduction in 59 patients (37 males, 36+/-14 years, 60 APs). First generation 1-magnet tip (1-M) (group I, n=18), second generation bipolar 3-magnet tip (3-M) (group II, n=27), and third generation quadripolar 3-magnet tip catheters (3-M quad.) (group III, n=14) were used for magnetic remote-controlled ablation. Successful AP ablation was achieved in 67% (group I), 85% (group II), and 92% (group III). A significant decrease of median [IQR: Q1-Q3] fluoroscopy time and dosage was observed: 21.2 [12.1-33.8] min, 1110 [395-3234] microGym2 (group I); 6.5 [4.4-15.4] min, 290 [129-489] microGym2 (group II), and 4.9 [3.4-8.0] min, 129 [74-270] microGym2 (group III). Mean procedure time (217+/-67 min; 182+/-68 min, and 172+/-90 min) significantly decreased in group III. Median number [Q1-Q3] of radiofrequency current applications in groups I, II, and III was 4 [2-9], 4 [2-6], and 2 [2-4], respectively. No complications occurred. CONCLUSION: Remote AP ablation is safe and feasible using the novel MNS. Introduction of the 3-magnet quadripolar ablation catheter significantly improved the efficacy of the procedure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chun et al. (2006) conducted an observational in Accessory pathway conduction (n=59). Magnetic remote-controlled accessory pathway ablation (third-generation 3-magnet quadripolar catheter) vs. First-generation 1-magnet tip catheter was evaluated on Successful accessory pathway ablation. Remote accessory pathway ablation using a third-generation quadripolar 3-magnet catheter achieved a 92% success rate, compared to 67% with first-generation catheters.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: