Robotic magnetic navigation

Robotic magnetic navigation (RMN) (also called remote magnetic navigation) uses robotic technology to direct magnetic fields which control the movement of magnetic-tipped endovascular catheters into and through the chambers of the heart during cardiac catheterization procedures.[1]

Devices

Because the human heart beats during ablation procedures, catheter stability can be affected by navigation technique. Magnetic fields created by RMN technology guide the tip of a catheter using a “pull” mechanism of action (as opposed to “push” with manual catheter navigation). Magnetic catheter navigation has been associated with greater catheter stability.[2]

Medical use

Atrial fibrilation

As of 2015 there were two robotic catheterization systems on the market for atrial fibrilation; one of them used magnetic guidance.[3]

After long-term follow up, RMN navigation has been associated with better procedural and clinical outcomes for AF ablation when compared with manual catheter navigation for cardiac ablation.[4]

Ventricular tachycardia

RMN has been shown to be safe and effective for cardiac catheter ablation in various patient populations with ventricular tachycardia.[5][6]

References
  1. Da Costa, A; Guichard, JB; Roméyer-Bouchard, C; Gerbay, A; Isaaz, K (2016). "Robotic magnetic navigation for ablation of human arrhythmias". Medical Devices: Evidence and Research. 9: 331–339. doi:10.2147/MDER.S96167. PMC 5034914. PMID 27698569.
  2. Davis, DR; Tang, AS; Gollob, MH; Lemery, R; Green, MS; Birnie, DH (July 2008). "Remote magnetic navigation-assisted catheter ablation enhances catheter stability and ablation success with lower catheter temperatures". Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. 31 (7): 893–8. doi:10.1111/j.1540-8159.2008.01105.x. PMID 18684288. S2CID 19617848.
  3. Gerstenfeld, EP; Duggirala, S (2015). "Atrial fibrillation ablation: indications, emerging techniques, and follow-up". Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases. 58 (2): 202–12. doi:10.1016/j.pcad.2015.07.008. PMID 26241304.
  4. Yuan, S; Holmqvist, F; Kongstad, O; Jensen, SM; Wang, L; Ljungström, E; Hertervig, E; Borgquist, R (December 2017). "Long-term outcomes of the current remote magnetic catheter navigation technique for ablation of atrial fibrillation". Scandinavian Cardiovascular Journal. 51 (6): 308–315. doi:10.1080/14017431.2017.1384566. PMID 28958165. S2CID 25501499.
  5. Turagam, MK; Atkins, D; Tung, R; Mansour, M; Ruskin, J; Cheng, J; Di Biase, L; Natale, A; Lakkireddy, D (September 2017). "A meta-analysis of manual versus remote magnetic navigation for ventricular tachycardia ablation". Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology. 49 (3): 227–235. doi:10.1007/s10840-017-0257-3. PMID 28624892. S2CID 21925778.
  6. Akca, F; Önsesveren, I; Jordaens, L; Szili-Torok, T (June 2012). "Safety and efficacy of the remote magnetic navigation for ablation of ventricular tachycardias--a systematic review". Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology. 34 (1): 65–71. doi:10.1007/s10840-011-9645-2. PMC 3342497. PMID 22180126.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.