Safety and efficacy of the remote magnetic navigation for ablation of ventricular tachycardias--a systematic review.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2011;
34:65-71. [PMID:
22180126 PMCID:
PMC3342497 DOI:
10.1007/s10840-011-9645-2]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2011] [Accepted: 11/13/2011] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Objective
Remote magnetic navigation (RMN) is considered to be a solution for mapping and ablation of several arrhythmias. In this systematic review we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of RMN in ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT).
Methods
The National Library of Medicine’s PubMed database was searched for articles containing any of a predetermined set of search terms that were published prior to November 1, 2011. Quality of evidence was rated using the GRADE system.
Results
The database search resulted in 11 relevant articles evaluating the usefulness of RMN. Three groups of VTs were studied: VT in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICMP), non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICMP) and structurally normal hearts (SNH). The use of RMN in patients with ICMP has been associated with success rates ranging from 71 to 80%. RMN has been shown to be a feasible and effective method for ablation of VT in NICMP and SNH patients. Success rates between 50% and 100% have been reported in NICMP populations. Rates ranging from 86% to 100% have been reported for SNH patients. The lowest rates of arrhythmia recurrence are reported for SNH patients (0–17%). In ICMP and NICMP, recurrence rates of 0–30% and 14–50%, respectively, have been reported. One patient experienced total heart block, and one patient experienced a thromboembolic event after RMN catheter ablation procedures.
Conclusions
RMN has been shown to be an effective and safe method for ablation of VT in various patient populations with low recurrence and complication rates. However, more comparative and randomized studies are necessary, and therefore the true value of RMN for VT ablation remains still unknown.
Collapse