Abstract
The current practice of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) lacks standardization and is regarded as an art. As the complexity of the lesions and procedures increase, intervention duration becomes longer, and there is an increased demand for precision and accuracy in device selection and position. Robotic systems have been suggested to enhance the performance of cardiovascular procedures. One of the technical features of a robotic system is the capability to control and accurately position (≤1-mm steps) the stent delivery system. The recent STLLR (Stent deployment Techniques on cLinicaL outcomes of patients treated with the cypheRstent) trial highlighted the impact of geographic miss and stent misplacement on clinical outcomes. A robotically assisted system may facilitate the positioning of the stent delivery system with a high degree of accuracy. With improved positioning, especially with advanced navigation systems, there is a potential to reduce exposure of patients to radiation and to minimize the volume of contrast media, thereby reducing the risk of contrast-induced nephropathy.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Costa MA, Angiolillo DJ, Tannenbaum M, et al. Impact of stent deployment procedural factors on long-term effectiveness and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents (final results of multicenter prospective STLLR trial). Am J Cardiol. 2008;101:1704–11.
Kline LW, Miller DL, Balter S, et al. Occupational hazards in the interventional laboratory: time for a safer environment. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;73:432–8.
Goldstein JA, Balter S, Crowley M, et al. Occupational hazards of interventional cardiologists: prevalence of orthopedic health problems in contemporary practice. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2004;63:407–11.
Ross AM, Segal J, Borenstein D, et al. Prevalence of spinal disc disease among interventional cardiologists. Am J Cardiol. 1997;79:68–70.
Duran AD, Duran GD, Ramirez RR, et al. Cataracts in interventional cardiology personnel. Retrospective evaluation study of lens injuries and dose (RELID Study). Eur Heart J. 2009;30:872.
Roguin A, Goldstein J, Bar O. Brain tumours among interventional cardiologists: a cause for alarm? Report of four new cases from two cities and a review of the literature. EuroIntervention. 2012;7:1081–6.
Garcia-Garcia HM, Tsuchida K, Meulenbrug H, et al. Magnetic navigation in a coronary phantom: experimental results. EuroIntervention. 2005;1:321–8.
Steve D, Servatius H, Rostock T, et al. Reduced fluoroscopy during atrial fibrillation ablation: benefits of robotic guided navigation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2010;21:6–12.
Flugelman M, Shiran A, Nusimovici-Avadis D, et al. Medical positioning system: a technical report. EuroIntervention. 2008;4:158–60.
Jeron A, Fredersdorf S, Debl K, et al. First-in-man (FIM) experience with the Magnetic Medical Positioning System (MPS) for intracoronary navigation. EuroIntervention. 2009;5:552–7.
Weisz G, Smilowitz NR, Moses JW, Rabbani LE, Collins MB, Herscovici A, Jeron A, Leon MB, Luchner A. Magnetic positioning system in coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention: A feasibility and safety study. Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions: official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions. 2013
Weisz G, Wong D, Laroche V, et al. Intracoronary navigation and positioning using the MediGuide gMPS enabled GMC system. Eurointervention. 2009;5:E11.
Ernst S, Ouyang F, Linder C, et al. Initial experience with remote catheter ablation using a novel magnetic navigation system: magnetic remote catheter ablation. Circulation. 2004;109:1472–5.
Ernst S, Ouyang F, Linder C, et al. Modulation of the slow pathway in the presence of a persistent left superior caval vein using the novel magnetic navigation system Niobe. Europace. 2004;6:10–4.
Faddis MN, Blume W, Finney J, et al. Novel, magnetically guided catheter for endocardial mapping and radiofrequency catheter ablation. Circulation. 2002;106:2980–5.
Tsuchida K, Garcia-Garcia HM, Tanimoto S, et al. Feasibility and safety of guidewire navigation using a magnetic navigation system in coronary artery stenoses. EuroIntervention. 2005;1:329–35.
Atmakuri SR, Lev EI, Alviar C, et al. Initial experience with a magnetic navigation system for percutaneous coronary intervention in complex coronary artery lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:515–21.
Kiemeneij F, Patterson MS, Amoroso G, et al. Use of the stereotaxis Niobe magnetic navigation system for percutaneous coronary intervention: results from 350 consecutive patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;71:510–6.
Hertting K, Ernst S, Stahl F, et al. Use of the novel magnetic system Niobe in percutaneous coronary interventions; the Hamburg experience. EuroIntervention. 2005;1:336–9.
Ramcharitar S, Patterson MS, van Genus RJ, et al. Magnetic navigation system used successfully to cross a crushed stent in a bifurcation that failed with conventional wires. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007;69:852–5.
Ramcharitar S, van der Giessen WJ, van der Ent M, et al. Randomized comparison of the magnetic navigation system vs. standard wires in the treatment of bifurcations. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:1479–83.
Tsuchida K, Garcia-Garcia HM, van der Giessen WJ, et al. Guidewire navigation in coronary artery stenosis using a novel magnetic navigation system: first clinical experience. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006;67:356–63.
Krause K, Adamu U, Weber M, et al. German stereotaxis-guided percutaneous coronary intervention study group: first multicenter real world experience. Clin Res Cardiol. 2009;98:541–7.
Ramcharitar S, van Geuns RJ, Patterson M, et al. A randomized comparison of the magnetic navigation system versus conventional percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;72:761–70.
Ramicharitar S, van Geuns RJ. Magnetic navigation in patients with coronary artery bypass grafting. EuroIntervention. 2009;5(Supplement D):D58–63.
Bach RG, Leach C, Milov SA, et al. Use of magnetic navigation to facilitate transcatheter alcohol septal ablation for hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. J Invasive Cardiol. 2006;18:E178.
Ramcharitar S, van der Giessen WJ, van der Ent M, et al. The feasibility and safety of applying the Magnetic Navigation System to manage chronically occluded vessels: a single centre experience. EuroIntervention. 2011;6:711–6.
Beyar R, Wenderow T, Lindner D, et al. Concept, design and pre-clinical studies for remote control percutaneous coronary interventions. EuroIntervention. 2005;1:340–5.
Beyar R, Gruberg L, Deleanu D, et al. Remote-control percutaneous coronary interventions: concept, validation, and first-in-humans pilot clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:296–300.
Granada JF, Delgado JA, Uribe MP, et al. First-in-human evaluation of a novel robotic-assisted coronary angioplasty system. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:460–5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag London
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Magallon, J.C., Weisz, G. (2014). Robotic-Assisted Coronary Intervention. In: Thompson, C. (eds) Textbook of Cardiovascular Intervention. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4528-8_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4528-8_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-4527-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4528-8
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)