4.3 Article

Use of the Stereotaxis Niobe® magnetic navigation system for percutaneous coronary intervention:: Results from 350 consecutive patients

Journal

CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
Volume 71, Issue 4, Pages 510-516

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ccd.21425

Keywords

magnetic navigation; percutaneous coronary intervention; transradial cath; quantitative coronary angiography

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: The Stereotaxis Niobe (R) magnetic navigation system (MNS; Stereotaxis, St. Louis, MID) facilitates precise vector based navigation of magnetically-enabled guidewires for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) by using two permanent magnets located on opposite sides of the patient table to produce a controllable magnetic field. The objective of this study is to describe the results of a large patient series using this system, to compare the results with a historical control group, and to detail the MNS learning curve. Methods: We prospectively collected data on 439 lesions in 350 consecutive PCI patients using the MNS predominantly using the radial approach. All data were entered into a customized database to capture the key parameters and then compared with a previously collected stent registry from the same center. Results: In 410/439 lesions (93%) the wire crossed the lesion successfully using the MNS. Twenty-five of the 35 failures were chronic total occlusions. No wire perforations or dissections occurred in this population. Lesion crossing time was 81 +/- 168 sec (mean +/- SD), and fluoroscopy time was 64 +/- 123 sec. A clear learning curve was evident after the first 80 patients. Contrast use was reduced when compared with a historical control group. Procedural and fluoroscopy times were similar. Conclusions: Use of the MNS may enable the successful performance of more complex procedures in the cardiac catheterization laboratory with an improvement in time efficiency. (C) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available