Zero-fluoroscopic Ablation Versus Conventional Fluoroscopic Ablation for the Treatment of Ventricular Arrhythmias

Multi-center, Randomized, Controlled, Prospective Trial to Compare the Feasibility, Safety, and Efficacy of Zero-fluoroscopic Ablation Versus Conventional Fluoroscopic Ablation for the Treatment of Ventricular Arrhythmias.

This study is intended to compare the feasibility, safety and efficacy of a zero-fluoroscopy approach using Ensite NavX as the only imaging modality with conventional fluoroscopic approach for the catheter ablation of idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias; conventional fluoroscopic approach use fluoroscopy plus Ensite NavX or plus Carto as the imaging modality.

Catheter ablation is a well-established treatment to treat patients with a wide range of heart rhythm disturbances. Fluoroscopy is a imaging modality routinely used for the ablation of arrhythmias.Due to the rising concern regarding the harmful effects of radiation exposure to both the patients and operation staffs; three-dimensional mapping systems, including CARTO and Ensite NavX, have been developed and implemented in electrophysiological procedure for the navigation of catheters inside the heart chambers. Ensite NavX system can be used for zero-fluoroscopy approach for catheter ablation of arrhythmias. This study is intended to compare the feasibility, safety and efficacy of a zero-fluoroscopy approach using Ensite NavX as the only imaging modality with conventional fluoroscopic approach for the catheter ablation of idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias; conventional fluoroscopic approach use fluoroscopy plus Ensite NavX or plus Carto as the imaging modality.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Ventricular Tachycardia
• Ventricular Premature Complexes

Exclusion Criteria:

• Organic ventricular tachycardia or ventricular premature complexes
• Drug-induced ventricular tachycardia or ventricular premature complexes