ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2011
Remote magnetic versus manual catheters: evaluation of ablation effect in atrial fibrillation by myocardial marker levels.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Radiofrequency atrial fibrillation ablation with irrigated tip catheter using remote magnetic navigation compared with conventional manual method.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2021Pooled it
- Comparison Between Efficacy and Safety of Remote Magnetic Navigation and Manual Catheter Navigation for Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: An Updated Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2025Review
- Contact force sensing manual catheter versus remote magnetic navigation ablation of atrial fibrillation: a single-center comparison.Heart and vessels · 2024Article
- Impact of catheter ablation with remote magnetic navigation on procedural outcomes in patients with persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2015Observational
- Remote magnetic navigation for circumferential pulmonary vein ablation: single-catheter technique or additional use of a circular mapping catheter?Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2014Article
- Forces on cardiac implantable electronic devices during remote magnetic navigation.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2013Article
- Relationship between ablation index and myocardial biomarkers after radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalArticle
- Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Using Magnetic Navigation Comparison With Conventional Approach During Long-Term Follow-Up.Journal of atrial fibrillationReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA remote magnetic navigation (MN) system is available for radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF), challenging the conventional manual ablation technique. The myocardial markers were measured to compare the effects of the two types of MN catheters with those of a manual-irrigated catheter in AF ablation.
methodsAF patients underwent an ablation procedure using either a conventional manual-irrigated catheter (CIR, n = 65) or an MN system utilizing either an irrigated (RMI, n = 23) or non-irrigated catheter (RMN, n = 26). Levels of troponin T (TnT) and the cardiac isoform of creatin kinase (CKMB) were measured before and after ablation.
resultsMean procedure times and total ablation times were longer employing the remote magnetic system. In all groups, there were pronounced increases in markers of myocardial injury after ablation, demonstrating a significant correlation between total ablation time and post-ablation levels of TnT and CKMB (CIR r = 0.61 and 0.53, p < 0.001; RMI r = 0.74 and 0.73, p < 0.001; and RMN r = 0.51 and 0.59, p < 0.01). Time-corrected release of TnT was significantly higher in the CIR group than in the other groups. Of the patients, 59.6% were free from AF at follow-up (12.2 ± 5.4 months) and there were no differences in success rate between the three groups.
conclusionsRemote magnetic catheters may create more discrete and predictable ablation lesions measured by myocardial enzymes and may require longer total ablation time to reach the procedural endpoints. Remote magnetic non-irrigated catheters do not appear to be inferior to magnetic irrigated catheters in terms of myocardial enzyme release and clinical outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.