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

10Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Data comparing remote magnetic catheter navigation (RMN) with manual catheter navigation (MCN) ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is lacking. The aim of the present prospective observational study was to compare the outcome of RMN versus (vs.) MCN ablation of AF with regards to AF recurrence. Methods: The study comprised 667 consecutive patients with a total of 939 procedures: 287 patients were ablated using RMN, 380 using MCN. Results: There was no significant difference between the groups at baseline. After 2.3 ± 2.3 years of follow-up, 23% of the patients in the MCN group remained free of AF recurrence compared to 13% in the RMN group (p

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schlögl, S., Schlögl, K. S., Haarmann, H., Bengel, P., Bergau, L., Rasenack, E., … Zabel, M. (2022). Remote magnetic navigation versus manual catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: A single center long-term comparison. PACE - Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 45(1), 14–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.14392

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free