ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2022
Dipole charge density mapping integrated in remote magnetic navigation: First-in-human feasibility study.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical value of robot-assisted catheter navigation for cardiac electrophysiology ablation: current evidence and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Recent highlights from theInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2024Article
- Charge density mapping demonstrates superiority in catheter ablation of post-surgical atrial tachycardias.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- The performance of dipole charge density mapping integrated with robotic magnetic navigation in the treatment of atrial tachycardias.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Robotic magnetic navigation (RMN) provides increased catheter precision and stability. Formerly, only the CARTO 3 mapping system was integrated with the RMN system (CARTO-RMN). Recently, a novel high-resolution non-contact mapping system (AcQMap) has been integrated with the RMN system (AcQMap-RMN) for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial tachycardias (AT). We aim to compare the safety, efficiency, and efficacy of AcQMap-RMN with CARTO-RMN guided catheter ablation (CA) procedures. Material and methods: In this prospective registry, procedural safety efficiency and outcome data from total of 238 consecutive patients (147 AcQMap-RMN and 91 CARTO-RMN patients) were compared. Results: AcQMap-RMN is non-inferior in the primary endpoint of safety as compared to CARTO-RMN across the whole group (overall procedural complications in 5 (3.4%) vs. 3 (3.3%) patients, p = 1.0). Overall procedure durations were longer and associated with more fluoroscopy use with AcQMap-RMN (172.5 vs. 129.6 min, p < 0.01; 181.0 vs. 131.0 mGy, p = 0.02, respectively). Procedure duration and fluoroscopy use decreased significantly between the first 30 and the last 30 AcQMap-RMN procedures. The AcQMap-RMN system had fewer recurrences after persistent AF ablations and was non-inferior in paroxysmal AF patients compared to CARTO-RMN at 12 months (36.6% vs. 75.0%, p = 0.04, PAF 6.6% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.58; respectively). CA of AT outcomes were better using the AcQMap-RMN system (1 year recurrence 17.1% vs. 38.7%, p < 0.05). Conclusion: AcQMap-RMN integration has no negative impact on the excellent safety profile of RMN guided ablations. It improves outcomes of CA procedures for persAF and AT but requires longer procedure times and higher fluoroscopy use during the initial learning phase.
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.