Aims Currently, comparative data on procedural and long-term clinical outcome of outflow tract (OT) idiopathic ventricular arrhythmia (IVA) ablation with manual (MAN), contact force (CF), and magnetic navigation system (MNS) ablation are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare the procedural and long-term clinical outcome of MAN, CF, and MNS ablation of OT IVAs. Methods and results Seventy-three patients (31 MAN, 17 CF, and 25 MNS patients; consecutive per group) with OT IVA, who underwent catheter ablation in our centre were analysed. Procedural success rates (success at the end of the procedure), procedural data and long-term follow-up data were compared. Baseline patient demographics were comparable. Procedural success rates were similar (MAN 81%, 71% CF, and MNS 92%; P = 0.20). Median fluoroscopy time was shorter in the MNS group: MAN 29 (16-38), CF 37 (21-46), and MNS 13 (10-20) min (P = 0.002 for MNS vs. CF and MAN). The overall complication rate was: MAN 10%, CF 0%, and MNS 0% (P = 0.12). Median follow-up was: MAN 2184 (1672-2802), CF 1721 (1404-1913), and MNS 3031 (2524-3286) days (P <0.001). Recurrences occurred in MAN 46%, CF 50%, and MNS 46% (P = 0.97). Repeat procedures were performed in MAN 20%, CF 40%, and MNS 33% (P = 0.32). Conclusion Procedural and long-term clinical outcome of OT IVA ablation are equal for MAN, CF, and MNS. MNS has a favourable procedural safety profile due to the shorter fluoroscopy time compared with MAN and CF.

Additional Metadata
Keywords Catheter ablation, Clinical outcome, Contact force, Idiopathic ventricular arrhythmia, Long-term follow-up, Magnetic navigation system, Outflow tract
Persistent URL dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euy004, hdl.handle.net/1765/108873
Journal Europace
Citation
de Vries, L.J, Hendriks, A.A, Yap, S-C, Theuns, D.A.M.J, van Domburg, R.T, & Szili-Torok, T. (2018). Procedural and long-term outcome after catheter ablation of idiopathic outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias: Comparing manual, contact force, and magnetic navigated ablation. Europace, 20, ii22–ii27. doi:10.1093/europace/euy004