Mohit K Turagam1, Donita Atkins2, Roderick Tung3, Moussa Mansour4, Jeremy Ruskin4, Jie Cheng5, Luigi Di Biase6, Andrea Natale7, Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy8. 1. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Missouri Hospital and Clinics, Columbia, MO, USA. 2. Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of Kansas Hospital & Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Kansas City, KS, 6616, USA. 3. University of Chicago Medicine, Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. 4. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Texas Heart Institute, Houston, TX, USA. 6. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 7. Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute at St. David's Medical Center, Austin, TX, USA. 8. Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of Kansas Hospital & Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Kansas City, KS, 6616, USA. dlakkireddy@kumc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are limited studies on the safety and efficacy of remote magnetic navigation (RMN) versus manual navigation (MAN) in ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using the keywords VT ablation, stereotaxis, RMN and MAN in Pubmed, Ebsco, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google scholar databases. RESULTS: The analysis included seven studies (one randomized, three prospective observational, and three retrospective) including 779 patients [both structural heart disease (SHD) and idiopathic VT] comparing RMN (N = 433) and MAN (N = 339) in VT ablation. The primary end point of long-term VT recurrence was significantly lower with RMN (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.85, p = 0.003) compared with MAN. Other end points of acute procedural success (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.40-3.23, p = 0.0004) was significantly higher with RMN compared with MAN. Fluoroscopy [mean difference -10.42, 95% CI -12.7 to -8.1, p < 0.0001], procedural time [mean difference -9.79, 95% CI -19.27 to -0.3, p = 0.04] and complications (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17-0.74, p = 0.0006) were also significantly lower in RMN when compared with MAN. In a subgroup analysis SHD, there was no significant difference in VT recurrence or acute procedural success with RMN vs. MAN. In idiopathic VT, RMN significantly increased acute procedural success with no difference in VT recurrence. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate that RMN is safe and effective when compared with MAN in patients with both SHD and idiopathic VT undergoing catheter ablation. Further prospective studies are needed to further verify the safety and efficacy of RMN.
BACKGROUND: There are limited studies on the safety and efficacy of remote magnetic navigation (RMN) versus manual navigation (MAN) in ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using the keywords VT ablation, stereotaxis, RMN and MAN in Pubmed, Ebsco, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google scholar databases. RESULTS: The analysis included seven studies (one randomized, three prospective observational, and three retrospective) including 779 patients [both structural heart disease (SHD) and idiopathic VT] comparing RMN (N = 433) and MAN (N = 339) in VT ablation. The primary end point of long-term VT recurrence was significantly lower with RMN (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.85, p = 0.003) compared with MAN. Other end points of acute procedural success (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.40-3.23, p = 0.0004) was significantly higher with RMN compared with MAN. Fluoroscopy [mean difference -10.42, 95% CI -12.7 to -8.1, p < 0.0001], procedural time [mean difference -9.79, 95% CI -19.27 to -0.3, p = 0.04] and complications (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17-0.74, p = 0.0006) were also significantly lower in RMN when compared with MAN. In a subgroup analysis SHD, there was no significant difference in VT recurrence or acute procedural success with RMN vs. MAN. In idiopathic VT, RMN significantly increased acute procedural success with no difference in VT recurrence. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate that RMN is safe and effective when compared with MAN in patients with both SHD and idiopathic VT undergoing catheter ablation. Further prospective studies are needed to further verify the safety and efficacy of RMN.
Entities:
Keywords:
Catheter ablation; Remote magnetic navigation and manual navigation system; Stereotaxis; Ventricular tachycardia
Authors: Roderick Tung; Marmar Vaseghi; David S Frankel; Pasquale Vergara; Luigi Di Biase; Koichi Nagashima; Ricky Yu; Sitaram Vangala; Chi-Hong Tseng; Eue-Keun Choi; Shaan Khurshid; Mehul Patel; Nilesh Mathuria; Shiro Nakahara; Wendy S Tzou; William H Sauer; Kairav Vakil; Usha Tedrow; J David Burkhardt; Venkatakrishna N Tholakanahalli; Anastasios Saliaris; Timm Dickfeld; J Peter Weiss; T Jared Bunch; Madhu Reddy; Arun Kanmanthareddy; David J Callans; Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy; Andrea Natale; Francis Marchlinski; William G Stevenson; Paolo Della Bella; Kalyanam Shivkumar Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2015-05-30 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Luigi Di Biase; Roderick Tung; Tamás Szili-Torok; J David Burkhardt; Peter Weiss; Rene Tavernier; Adam E Berman; Erik Wissner; William Spear; Xu Chen; Petr Neužil; Jan Skoda; Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy; Bruno Schwagten; Ken Lock; Andrea Natale Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2017-01-07 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Philip Aagaard; Andrea Natale; David Briceno; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Sanghamitra Mohanty; Carola Gianni; J David Burkhardt; Luigi DI Biase Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2016-03
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: John L Sapp; George A Wells; Ratika Parkash; William G Stevenson; Louis Blier; Jean-Francois Sarrazin; Bernard Thibault; Lena Rivard; Lorne Gula; Peter Leong-Sit; Vidal Essebag; Pablo B Nery; Stanley K Tung; Jean-Marc Raymond; Laurence D Sterns; George D Veenhuyzen; Jeff S Healey; Damian Redfearn; Jean-Francois Roux; Anthony S L Tang Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-05-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kazim H Narsinh; Ricardo Paez; Kerstin Mueller; M Travis Caton; Amanda Baker; Randall T Higashida; Van V Halbach; Christopher F Dowd; Matthew R Amans; Steven W Hetts; Alexander M Norbash; Daniel L Cooke Journal: Neuroradiol J Date: 2021-08-16
Authors: Richard G Bennett; Timothy Campbell; Ashish Sood; Ashwin Bhaskaran; Kasun De Silva; Lloyd Davis; Pierre Qian; Gopal Sivagangabalan; Mark J Cooper; Clara K Chow; Aravinda Thiagalingam; A Robert Denniss; Stuart P Thomas; Eddy Kizana; Saurabh Kumar Journal: Heliyon Date: 2021-12-06
Authors: Rita B Gagyi; Anna M E Noten; Sip Wijchers; Sing-Chien Yap; Rohit E Bhagwandien; Mark G Hoogendijk; Tamas Szili-Torok Journal: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Date: 2022-07-21
Authors: Indranill Basu-Ray; Dibbendhu Khanra; Sumit K Shah; Anindya Mukherjee; Sudhanva V Char; Bhavna Jain; T Jared Bunch; Michael Gold; Adedayo A Adeboye; Mohammad Saeed Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 1.976