Navigation systems - magnetic and robotic

To avoid me bothering Pierre Jais yet again (!), am I correct in thinking that Bordeaux do use the niobe magnetic navigation system for AF ablations?

Any thoughts Shannon, researcher and others on whether one is better than the other (as in magnetic and robotic) and why?

Many thanks,

Mike

EDIT: I've asked Pierre Jais via email this morning: I'm fairly sure that the answer will be yes anyway but just wanted to check. I know Ernst (who was instrumental in pioneering it SFAIAA) uses it at the Royal Brompton in London, whereas Schilling at London Bridge uses robotic rather than magnetic navigation.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2018 11:58AM by mwcf.

It’s also partly preference Mike, each have their pluses and minuses and both systems have seen significant advancements in recent years. These approaches definitively have their role, especially useful in access for some VT ablation techniques. But also some operators feel more comfortable using these guidance systems for AFIB ABL as well. Remote navigation also can help lower X-ray exposure for the operator.

Shannon

Indeed Shannon; Sabine Ernst mentioned to me that the magnetic nav was not only better for me in terms of more accurate positioning of the catheter but also for her since she's in the cath lab 2 days per week rather than once or twice in their lifetime as are (hopefully) most patients and, as such, mag nav massively reduces her own radiation exposure.