title: A randomized comparison of the magnetic navigation system versus conventional percutaneous coronary intervention.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  A randomized comparison of the magnetic navigation system (MNS) to conventional guidewire techniques in percutaneous coronary interventions.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  The MNS precisely directs a magnetized guidewire in vivo through two permanent external magnets.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 111 consecutive patients were enrolled. Crossing success, crossing-/fluoroscopy times, and contrast usage were directly compared. Lesions were classified according to the AHA/ACC criteria. Three tertiles of vessel/lesion complexity [low (<5), medium (6-10) and high (>10)] were defined using 3D reconstructions and angiographic information.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The crossing success for magnetic and the conventional wires were 93.3 and 95.6%, respectively. Crossing and fluoroscopy times were longer with the magnetic wires (72.9 +/- 50.3 sec vs. 58.1 +/- 47.2 sec, P < 0.001 and 66.2 +/- 44.1 sec vs. 55.2 +/- 44.4 sec, P = 0.03, respectively). In vessels with low and medium complexity the magnetic wires had significantly longer times (P < 0.001) but for those with high scores (>10) a trend towards shorter times was observed. The MNS resulted in a small but significant reduction in contrast usage (2.3 +/- 3.5 ml vs. 4.5 +/- 4.4 ml, P < 0.001). Moreover by superimposing a virtual roadmap of the vessel on the live fluoroscopy image 48% of the lesions were crossed without requiring contrast agents with the MNS.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The MNS has comparable crossing success to conventional PCI. It is relatively slower but there is a trend to support a potential advantage in more complex vessels. By simultaneously employing a virtual roadmap there is a small but significant reduction in contrast usage.
authors.affiliation: Thoraxcenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
authors.forename: Steve
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Ramcharitar
authors.forename: Robert Jan
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: van Geuns
authors.forename: Mark
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Patterson
authors.forename: Willem J
authors.initials: WJ
authors.lastname: van der Giessen
authors.forename: Martin
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: van der Ent
authors.forename: Ron T
authors.initials: RT
authors.lastname: van Domburg
authors.forename: Patrick W
authors.initials: PW
authors.lastname: Serruys
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D015906:Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D003287:Contrast Media; D017023:Coronary Angiography; D003324:Coronary Artery Disease / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000628:therapy*; D005260:Female; D005471:Fluoroscopy; D006801:Humans; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional; D008280:Magnetics; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011857:Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014584:User-Computer Interface
chemical_list: D003287:Contrast Media