This review summarizes the current landscape of robotic systems in invasive cardiac electrophysiology, highlighting their advantages, limitations, and future potential.
Robotic EP systems remain investigational without proven routine benefit; leaves open the optimal features for future platforms pending prospective trials.
Robotic systems allow for mapping and ablation of different arrhythmia substrates replacing hand maneuvering of intracardiac catheters with machine steering. Currently there are four commercially available robotic systems. Niobe magnetic navigation system (Stereotaxis Inc., St Louis, MO) and Sensei robotic navigation system (Hansen Medical Inc., Mountain View, CA) have an established platform with at least 10 years of clinical studies looking at their efficacy and safety. AMIGO Remote Catheter System (Catheter Robotics, Inc., Mount Olive, NJ) and Catheter Guidance Control and Imaging (Magnetecs, Inglewood, CA) are in the earlier phases of implementations with ongoing feasibility and some limited clinical studies. This review discusses the advantages and limitations related to each existing system and highlights the ideal futuristic robotic system that may include the most promising features of the current ones.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shurrab et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: