Why the study?
Does cavo-tricuspid isthmus radiofrequency ablation using a novel remote navigation catheter system achieve stable bidirectional block in patients with typical atrial flutter?
Does cavo-tricuspid isthmus radiofrequency ablation using a novel remote navigation catheter system achieve stable bidirectional block in patients with typical atrial flutter?
The novel AMIGO remote catheter navigation system is feasible, safe, and highly effective (98% success rate) for achieving bidirectional block in typical atrial flutter ablation.
May support remote navigation for CTI ablation in typical flutter; leaves open need for randomized trials versus manual approach.
AIMS: A new remote catheter system (AMIGO™ Remote Catheter System) compatible with conventional ablation catheters is now commercially available but no data about its performance in clinical use during ablation have been reported. This study evaluates the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of cavo-tricuspid isthmus (CTI) ablation with this system in patients with typical atrial flutter (AFl). METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty patients with typical AFl underwent CTI ablation using the new remote catheter navigation system with 8 mm tip or irrigated catheters in three centres following each centre's routine practice. The endpoint was stable bidirectional CTI block. CTI ablation was successful in 98% of patients. Ablation was completed manually in one patient. The overall procedure, fluoroscopy, and radiofrequency times (median ± standard deviation, range) were 123 ± 42 (50-250), 24 ± 13 (3-82), and 10 ± 8 (1.17-43.3) min, respectively. Three patients had vascular complications not requiring surgical intervention. There were no complications related to the remote catheter manipulation system. CONCLUSION: Cavo-tricuspid isthmus ablation for typical AFl can be safely and effectively performed with the AMIGO™. The learning curve seems to be short even for physicians with limited ablation experience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
López‐Gil et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: