Direct results of a prospective randomized study comparing ablation with the nMARQ catheter and the PVAC catheter used with and without a 3D system (MAPER 3D Study).
PVAC catheter
atrial fibrillation
nMARQ catheter
pulmonary vein isolation
radiofrequency catheter ablation
Journal
Archives of medical science : AMS
ISSN: 1734-1922
Titre abrégé: Arch Med Sci
Pays: Poland
ID NLM: 101258257
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2019
Jan 2019
Historique:
received:
12
02
2017
accepted:
12
04
2017
entrez:
31
1
2019
pubmed:
31
1
2019
medline:
31
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Our aim was to compare in a prospective randomized study the safety, direct results and periprocedural data of ablation using an nMARQ catheter, a PVAC catheter used with the EnSite system, or a PVAC catheter only under fluoroscopy control. One hundred two patients (70 male, 57 ±11 years) with atrial fibrillation (AF) were prospectively randomized to: group 1 - ablation performed with an nMARQ catheter and the CARTO 3 system; group 2 - a PVAC catheter used with the EnSite system; group 3 - ablation with a PVAC catheter without a 3D system. Complete isolation of 400/402 pulmonary veins (PV) (99.5%). Linear ablation was performed in 23 patients in group 1 (small distance between lines isolating PV), in 3 patients in group 2, in 1 patient in group 3. The superior vena cava was isolated in 1 patient, 9 patients, and 9 patients respectively. Duration of fluoroscopy and dose area product were significantly smaller in group 1 (6.5 ±2.9 min/808.8 ±393.9 cGy/cm The lowest radiological exposure was observed during ablation performed with an nMARQ catheter. 3D systems reduced fluoroscopy duration and the necessity of contrast injection. The nMARQ catheter requires injection of a large volume of fluid.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30697256
doi: 10.5114/aoms.2017.68054
pii: 30049
pmc: PMC6348353
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
78-85Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Edward Koźluk – Medtronic and Johnson and Johnson proctor for ablation procedures. Others authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008 Jul 22;52(4):273-8
pubmed: 18634982
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2010 Feb;3(1):32-8
pubmed: 19995881
Kardiol Pol. 2010 Feb;68(2):175-80
pubmed: 20301026
Europace. 2012 Apr;14(4):528-606
pubmed: 22389422
Europace. 2012 Oct;14(10):1385-413
pubmed: 22923145
Arch Med Sci. 2013 Oct 31;9(5):821-5
pubmed: 24273563
Cardiol J. 2013;20(6):618-25
pubmed: 24338539
Europace. 2014 Jun;16(6):820-5
pubmed: 24443035
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2014 Aug;25(8):866-874
pubmed: 24654678
Europace. 2014 Aug;16(8):1145-53
pubmed: 24843051
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2015 Aug;26(8):906
pubmed: 25656773
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2015 Jul;38(7):797-806
pubmed: 25790320
Europace. 2016 Jun;18(6):807-14
pubmed: 26589623
Herz. 2016 Nov;41(7):625-629
pubmed: 26883899
N Engl J Med. 2016 Jun 9;374(23):2235-45
pubmed: 27042964
Europace. 2016 Aug;18(8):1164-9
pubmed: 27247003
Eur Heart J. 2016 Oct 7;37(38):2858-2865
pubmed: 27381589
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016 Nov;27(11):1282-1287
pubmed: 27468731
Europace. 2016 Nov;18(11):1609-1678
pubmed: 27567465