Remote Magnetic Versus Manual Catheter Navigation for Ablation of Supraventricular Tachycardias: A Randomized, Multicenter Trial

ArticleinPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 31(10):1313 - 1321 · September 2008with12 Reads
Impact Factor: 1.13 · DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2008.01183.x


    Introduction:The potential benefits of remote robotic navigation for catheter ablation procedures have not been demonstrated in controlled clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to compare remote magnetic catheter navigation to manual navigation for the ablation of common supraventricular arrhythmias.Methods and Results:Patients with supraventricular arrhythmias due to atrioventricular (AV) nodal reentry, accessory pathways, or undergoing AV junctional ablation for complete heart block were randomized in a 3:1 ratio between magnetic (Niobe system and Helios II catheter, Stereotaxis, Inc., St. Louis, MO) and manual navigation for radiofrequency ablation at 13 centers. The primary endpoint of the study was total fluoroscopic time. Fifty-six patients were randomized to magnetic navigation and 15 to manual navigation. AV nodal reentry was the most common arrhythmia in both groups. Total fluoroscopy time was reduced in the magnetic navigation group (median 17.8 minutes, interquartile (IQ) range 9.9,27.8 minutes) compared to manual navigation (27.1, IQ 19.0,48.0, P < 0.05). The acute success rates (91% for magnetic and 87% for manual navigation, P > 0.05) did not differ between groups. The number of lesions delivered was less for magnetic navigation (6, IQ 4,9 vs 10, IQ 7, 26, P < 0.05). Total procedure time (median 151, IQ 111, 221 minutes magnetic and 151, IQ 110, 221 minutes manual) and complication rates (5.4% patients magnetic and 6.7% patients manual) were similar between the groups (both P > 0.05).Conclusions:Remote magnetic catheter navigation reduces fluoroscopic time and radiofrequency lesion deliveries for the ablation of common supraventricular arrhythmias compared to manual catheter navigation.