Role of three-dimensional imaging integration in atrial fibrillation ablation

Table 3 Overview of the studies designed to evaluate the impact of imaging integration for atrial fibrillation ablation on the procedure and clinical outcomes

Author	No. of pts	Type of study	Imaging	Type of evaluation	FU	Effect of imaging integration
						Fluoroscopy time	Procedure duration	Complications	Clinical outcome
Kistler et al[31]	94	Non-randomized	CT	3D vs Merge	6 mo	↓	=	=	↑
Martinek et al[32]	100	Non-randomized	CT	XP vs Merge	6 mo	=	=	↓	↑
Kistler et al[33]	80	Randomized	CT	XP vs Merge	1 yr	=	=	=	=
Tang et al[34]	81	Randomized	CT	XP vs Merge	1 yr	↓	↓	=	=
Della Bella et al[35]	290	Randomized	CT	Conv vs Merge	> 1 yr	↑	↑	=	↑
Bertaglia et al[36]	573	Non-randomized	CT/MRI	Conv vs XP vs Merge	> 1 yr	=	↓	=	↑
Caponi et al[37]	299	Randomized	MRI	XP vs Merge	1 yr	↓	=	=	=

3D: Three-dimensional; Conv: Conventional; CT: Computed tomography; FU: Follow-up; Merge: CartoMerge; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; XP: Carto XP; ↑: Increased; ↓: Decreased; ═: No difference; pts: Patients.