Mitsuharu Kawamura1, Melvin M Scheinman2, Zian H Tseng2, Byron K Lee2, Gregory M Marcus2, Nitish Badhwar2. 1. The Division of Cardiac Electrophysiology, University of California, 500 Parnassus Avenue, MUE 434, San Francisco, CA, 94143-1354, USA. kamitsu0709@yahoo.co.jp. 2. The Division of Cardiac Electrophysiology, University of California, 500 Parnassus Avenue, MUE 434, San Francisco, CA, 94143-1354, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Catheter ablation for idiopathic ventricular arrhythmia (VA) is effective and safe, but efficacy is frequently limited due to an epicardial origin and difficult anatomy. The remote magnetic navigation (RMN) catheter has a flexible catheter design allowing access to difficult anatomy. We describe the efficacy of the RMN for ablation of idiopathic VA after failed manual ablation. METHODS: Among 235 patients with idiopathic VA referred for catheter ablation, we identified 51 patients who were referred for repeat ablation after a failed manual ablation. We analyzed the clinical characteristics, including the successful ablation site and findings at electrophysiology study, in repeat procedures conducted using RMN as compared with manual ablation. Among these patients, 22 (43 %) underwent repeat ablation with the RMN and 29 (57 %) underwent repeat ablation with a manual ablation. RESULTS: Overall, successful ablation rate was significantly higher using RMN as compared with manual ablation (91 vs. 69 %, P = 0.02). Fluoroscopy time in the RMN was 17 ± 12 min as compared with 43 ± 18 min in the manual ablation (P = 0.009). Successful ablation rate in the posterior right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) plus posterior-tricuspid annulus was higher with RMN as compared with manual ablation (92 vs. 50 %, P = 0.03). Neither groups exhibited any major complications. CONCLUSIONS: The RMN is more effective in selected patients with recurrent idiopathic VA after failed manual ablation and is associated with less fluoroscopy time. The RMN catheters have a flexible design enabling them to access otherwise difficult anatomy including the posterior tricuspid annulus and posterior RVOT.
PURPOSE: Catheter ablation for idiopathic ventricular arrhythmia (VA) is effective and safe, but efficacy is frequently limited due to an epicardial origin and difficult anatomy. The remote magnetic navigation (RMN) catheter has a flexible catheter design allowing access to difficult anatomy. We describe the efficacy of the RMN for ablation of idiopathic VA after failed manual ablation. METHODS: Among 235 patients with idiopathic VA referred for catheter ablation, we identified 51 patients who were referred for repeat ablation after a failed manual ablation. We analyzed the clinical characteristics, including the successful ablation site and findings at electrophysiology study, in repeat procedures conducted using RMN as compared with manual ablation. Among these patients, 22 (43 %) underwent repeat ablation with the RMN and 29 (57 %) underwent repeat ablation with a manual ablation. RESULTS: Overall, successful ablation rate was significantly higher using RMN as compared with manual ablation (91 vs. 69 %, P = 0.02). Fluoroscopy time in the RMN was 17 ± 12 min as compared with 43 ± 18 min in the manual ablation (P = 0.009). Successful ablation rate in the posterior right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) plus posterior-tricuspid annulus was higher with RMN as compared with manual ablation (92 vs. 50 %, P = 0.03). Neither groups exhibited any major complications. CONCLUSIONS: The RMN is more effective in selected patients with recurrent idiopathic VA after failed manual ablation and is associated with less fluoroscopy time. The RMN catheters have a flexible design enabling them to access otherwise difficult anatomy including the posterior tricuspid annulus and posterior RVOT.
Authors: Luigi Di Biase; Pasquale Santangeli; Vladimir Astudillo; Sergio Conti; Prasant Mohanty; Sanghamitra Mohanty; Javier E Sanchez; Rodney Horton; Barbara Thomas; J David Burkhardt; Andrea Natale Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2010-04-28 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Arash Aryana; Andre d'Avila; E Kevin Heist; Theofanie Mela; Jagmeet P Singh; Jeremy N Ruskin; Vivek Y Reddy Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-02-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: S Kamakura; W Shimizu; K Matsuo; A Taguchi; K Suyama; T Kurita; N Aihara; T Ohe; K Shimomura Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-10-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Saenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Sáenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: Europace Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Anna M E Noten; Nawin L Ramdat Misier; Janneke A E Kammeraad; Sip Wijchers; Ingrid M Van Beynum; Michiel Dalinghaus; Thomas B Krasemann; Sing-Chien Yap; Natasja M S de Groot; Tamas Szili-Torok Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2022-04-29 Impact factor: 1.838
Authors: Lennart J de Vries; Mihran Martirosyan; Ron T van Domburg; Sip A Wijchers; Tamas Géczy; Tamas Szili-Torok Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 1.900