Remote magnetic navigation versus manual catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: A single center long‐term comparison

• DOI: 10.1111/pace.14392
• Publication Date: 2021-10-23T05:32:30Z
• Authors: Simon Schlögl; Klaudia Stella Sc...; Helge Haarmann; Philipp Bengel; Leonard Bergau; Eva Rasenack; Gerd Hasenfuss; Markus Zabel
• Keywords: Single Center

Abstract Background Data comparing remote magnetic catheter navigation (RMN) with manual (MCN) ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is lacking. The aim the present prospective observational study was to compare outcome RMN versus (vs.) MCN AF regards recurrence. Methods comprised 667 consecutive patients a total 939 procedures: 287 were ablated using RMN, 380 MCN. Results There no significant difference between groups at baseline. After 2.3 ± years follow‐up, 23% in group remained free recurrence compared 13% ( p < .001). analysis 299 repeat ablations (133 MCN, 166 RMN) there significantly higher reconnection rate pulmonary veins after In multivariable Cox‐regression analysis, an independent risk factor for besides age, persistent AF, number isolated veins, and left diameter. Procedure time, radiofrequency application time points group. Total fluoroscopy dose lower RMN. Complication rates did not differ = .842), although incidence pericardial effusion (seven cases vs. three group). Conclusions our vein similar complication but reduced probability when