Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2010
Remote robotic catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: how fast is it learned and what benefits can be earned?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rillig Andreas, Meyerfeldt Udo, Birkemeyer Ralf, Treusch Fabian, Kunze Markus, Miljak Tomislav, Zvereva Vlada, Jung Werner
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Recently, results describing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) on patients using a robotic navigation system (RNS) in a high-volume center specialized in pulmonary vein isolation were published. The main purpose of this prospective study was to evaluate the learning curve of new users of RNS in a community hospital and to address the effectivity of RNS in electrophysiological settings with fewer patients. Radiation times, procedural times, feasibility, and safety with the RNS were assessed.
METHODS: PVI using the RNS was performed on 100 consecutive patients with symptomatic paroxysmal (n = 56, 56%) or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). To assess the learning curve of practitioners with first-time use of RNS, patients were divided into four groups of 25 patients each (Q1-Q4). Procedural times as well as radiation times, complications, and outcome after a 6-month follow-up period were assessed for each quartile. All patients were ablated by the same physician.
RESULTS: Comparing the four patient groups, a continuous and significant reduction of procedural and radiation times was seen in the first 75 patients (Q1-Q3), whereas no further improvement was seen in the consecutive patients (Q3-Q4). One pericardial tamponade occurred in the course of 100 patients (1%). Overall success rate after a 6-month follow-up period was 74% in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF. Comparing the four quartiles there was a higher but non-significant number of patients with freedom of atrial fibrillation after a 6-month follow-up in the subsequent groups (Q2-Q4) when compared to group 1.
CONCLUSIONS: This data suggest that RNS is feasible and safe when performed in a community hospital with a significant reduction of radiation times and procedure times within the first 75 patients and with similar success and complication rates as compared to high-volume centers.
METHODS: PVI using the RNS was performed on 100 consecutive patients with symptomatic paroxysmal (n = 56, 56%) or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). To assess the learning curve of practitioners with first-time use of RNS, patients were divided into four groups of 25 patients each (Q1-Q4). Procedural times as well as radiation times, complications, and outcome after a 6-month follow-up period were assessed for each quartile. All patients were ablated by the same physician.
RESULTS: Comparing the four patient groups, a continuous and significant reduction of procedural and radiation times was seen in the first 75 patients (Q1-Q3), whereas no further improvement was seen in the consecutive patients (Q3-Q4). One pericardial tamponade occurred in the course of 100 patients (1%). Overall success rate after a 6-month follow-up period was 74% in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF. Comparing the four quartiles there was a higher but non-significant number of patients with freedom of atrial fibrillation after a 6-month follow-up in the subsequent groups (Q2-Q4) when compared to group 1.
CONCLUSIONS: This data suggest that RNS is feasible and safe when performed in a community hospital with a significant reduction of radiation times and procedure times within the first 75 patients and with similar success and complication rates as compared to high-volume centers.