Table 3.
Overview of the studies designed to evaluate the impact of imaging integration for atrial fibrillation ablation on the procedure and clinical outcomes
| Author | No. of pts | Type of study | Imaging | Type of evaluation | FU |
Effect of imaging integration |
|||
| Fluoroscopy time | Procedure duration | Complications | Clinical outcome | ||||||
| Kistler et al[31] | 94 | Non-randomized | CT | 3D vs Merge | 6 mo | ↓ | = | = | ↑ |
| Martinek et al[32] | 100 | Non-randomized | CT | XP vs Merge | 6 mo | = | = | ↓ | ↑ |
| Kistler et al[33] | 80 | Randomized | CT | XP vs Merge | 1 yr | = | = | = | = |
| Tang et al[34] | 81 | Randomized | CT | XP vs Merge | 1 yr | ↓ | ↓ | = | = |
| Della Bella et al[35] | 290 | Randomized | CT | Conv vs Merge | > 1 yr | ↑ | ↑ | = | ↑ |
| Bertaglia et al[36] | 573 | Non-randomized | CT/MRI | Conv vs XP vs Merge | > 1 yr | = | ↓ | = | ↑ |
| Caponi et al[37] | 299 | Randomized | MRI | XP vs Merge | 1 yr | ↓ | = | = | = |
3D: Three-dimensional; Conv: Conventional; CT: Computed tomography; FU: Follow-up; Merge: CartoMerge; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; XP: Carto XP; ↑: Increased; ↓: Decreased; ═: No difference; pts: Patients.