Key result
Electromagnetic mapping for isthmus ablation in typical atrial flutter significantly reduced overall fluoroscopy time compared to conventional fluoroscopy (3.9 vs 22.0 minutes; P<0.0001).
Why the study?
Does electromagnetic mapping reduce fluoroscopy time compared to conventional fluoroscopy during ablation of typical atrial flutter?
RCT (n=50)
Does electromagnetic mapping reduce fluoroscopy time compared to conventional fluoroscopy during ablation of typical atrial flutter?
Absolute Event Rate: 3.9% vs 22%
p-value: p=<0.0001
Electromagnetic mapping during atrial flutter ablation significantly reduces fluoroscopy time compared to conventional fluoroscopy while maintaining high procedural efficacy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
May reduce radiation in flutter ablation; leaves open whether electromagnetic mapping improves outcomes.
Kottkamp et al. (2000) conducted an RCT in Typical atrial flutter (n=50). Electromagnetic mapping vs. Conventional fluoroscopy was evaluated on Overall fluoroscopy time (minutes) (p=<0.0001). Electromagnetic mapping for isthmus ablation in typical atrial flutter significantly reduced overall fluoroscopy time compared to conventional fluoroscopy (3.9 vs 22.0 minutes; P<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: