Skip to main content
. 2019 May 10;56(3):213–227. doi: 10.1007/s10840-019-00537-8

Table 3.

Studies comparing catheters with various electrode sizes and spacing

Catheter tested Comparator catheter Effect on overall voltage Effect on LVA size Reference
Name Electrode size (mm2) Electrode spacing (mm) Name Electrode size (mm2) Electrode spacing (mm)
Pentaray 1 2–6 Thermocool 3.5 1–6–2 Increase in scar only Decrease [21]
Lasso 1 8 Thermocool 3.5 1–6–2 Increase Decrease [20]
Orion Basket 0.4 2.5 Pentaray 1 2–6 Unchanged [87]
Lasso 1 1–2
Intella Tip 0.8 (within 4.5 mm tip) 1.2 TactiCath 3.5 2–5–2 Increased [88]
Circular mapping catheter 1 5 Unchanged
Inquiry Optima 1 7 Cool Flex 4 0.5–5–2 Decrease [89]

Catheters studied: Thermocool SmartTouch CF contact force-sensing catheter (Biosense Webster); Pentaray (Biosense Webster); Variable Loop Eco Nav (Biosense Webster); Orion Basket catheter (Boston Scientific); Inquiry Optima (St. Jude Medical); Intella Tip Micro Fidelity MiFi O/I (Boston Scientific); TactiCath Quartz (St. Jude Medical); Cool Flex (IBI/St. Jude Medical); HD-Grid catheter (Abbott, St. Paul, Minnesota). Spacing is as quoted by the manufacturer and is not ‘centre to centre’ spacing