Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 Aug;43(2):175-85.
doi: 10.1007/s10840-015-9992-5. Epub 2015 Apr 11.

Non-randomised Comparison of Acute and Long-Term Outcomes of Robotic Versus Manual Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation in a Single Centre Ischemic Cohort

Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

Non-randomised Comparison of Acute and Long-Term Outcomes of Robotic Versus Manual Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation in a Single Centre Ischemic Cohort

Vishal Luther et al. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. .
Free article

Abstract

Introduction: Robotically guided radiofrequency (RF) ablation offers greater catheter stability that may improve lesion depth. We performed a non-randomised comparison of patients undergoing ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation either manually or robotically using the Hansen Sensei system for recurrent implantable defibrillator (ICD) therapy.

Methods: Patients with infarct-related scar underwent VT ablation using the Hansen system to assess feasibility compared with patients undergoing manual VT ablation during a similar time period. Power delivery during robotic ablation was restricted to 30 W at 60 s. VT inducibility was checked at the end of the procedure. Pre-ablation ICD therapy burdens over 6 months were compared with post-ablation therapy averaged to a 6-month period.

Results: Twelve consecutive patients who underwent robotic VT ablation were compared to 12 consecutive patients undergoing a manual ablation. Patient demographics and comorbidities were similar in the two groups. A higher proportion of robotic cases were urgent (9/12 (75%)) vs. manual (4/12 (33%)) (p = 0.1). Post-ablation VT stimulation did not induce clinical VT in 11/12 (92%) in each group. There were no peri-procedural complications related to ablation delivery. Patients were followed up for approximately 2 years. Averaged over 6 months, robotic ICD therapy burdens fell from 32 (5-400) events to 2.5 (0-11) (p = 0.015). Therapy burden fell from 14 (10-25) to 1 (0-5) (p = 0.023) in the manual group. There was no difference in long-term outcome (p = 0.60) and mortality (4/12 (33%), p = 1.0).

Conclusion: Robotically guided VT ablation is both feasible and safe when compared to manual ablation with good acute and long-term outcomes.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2010 Jan;21(1):47-53 - PubMed
    1. Circulation. 2001 Aug 7;104(6):664-9 - PubMed
    1. Circulation. 2014 Feb 18;129(7):728-36 - PubMed
    1. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2008 Jan;21(1):19-26 - PubMed
    1. Lancet. 2010 Jan 2;375(9708):31-40 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback