Evidence Hub

Magnetic navigation system for percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis

Qi Z, Wu B, Luo X, Zhu J, Shi H, Jin B

Medicine, 2016

2,174 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Magnetic navigation system (MNS) allows calculation of the vessel coordinates in real space within the patient's chest for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, its impact on the procedural parameters and clinical outcomes is still a matter of debate. To derive a more precise estimation of the relationship, a meta-analysis was performed.

METHODS AND RESULTS: Studies exploring the advantages of MNS were identified in English-language articles by search of Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library Databases (inception to October 2015). A standardized protocol was used to extract details on study design, region origin, demographic data, lesion type, and clinical outcomes. The main outcome measures were contrast consumption, procedural success rate, contrast used for wire crossing, procedure time to cross the lesions, and the fluoroscopy time fluoroscopy time. A total of 12 clinical trials involving 2174 patients were included for analysis (902 patients in the magnetic PCI group and 1272 in the conventional PCI group). Overall, contrast consumption was decreased by 40.45 mL (95% confidence interval [CI] -70.98 to -9.92, P = 0.009) in magnetic PCI group compared with control group. In addition, magnetic PCI was associated with significantly decreasing procedural time by 2.17 minutes (95% CI -3.91 to -0.44, P = 0.01) and the total fluoroscopy time was significantly decreased by 1.43 minutes (95% CI -2.29 to -0.57, P = 0.001) in magnetic PCI group.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 2,174 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free