There is limited evidence to suggest which ablation method was the best .
There is limited evidence to suggest that CA may be a better treatment option compared to medical therapies in the management of persistent AF .
This review was also unable to recommend the best CA method
BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia seen in cardiovascular departments .
Treatments include medical interventions and catheter ablation .
Due to uncertainties in medical therapies for AF , and the need to continue sinus rhythm , ablation has been recently considered as a viable alternative .
Many new ablation methods based on pulmonary vein isolation ( PVI ) have been developed .
OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this review was to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of  catheter ablation ( CA ) in comparison with medical treatment in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF .
The secondary objective was to determine the best regimen of CA .
Robotic magnetic navigation for atrial fibrillation ablation.
OBJECTIVES We assessed feasibility of magnetic catheter guidance in patients with atrial fibrillation ( AF ) undergoing circumferential pulmonary vein ablation ( CPVA ) .  BACKGROUND No data are available on feasibility of remote navigation for AF ablation . METHODS Forty patients underwent CPVA for symptomatic AF using the NIOBE II remote magnetic system ( Stereotaxis Inc. , St. Louis , Missouri ) . Ablation was performed with a 4-mm tip , magnetic catheter ( 65 degrees C , maximum 50 W , 15 s ) . The catheter tip was guided by a uniform magnetic field ( 0.08-T ) , and a motor drive ( Cardiodrive unit , Stereotaxis Inc. ) . Left atrium maps were created using an integrated CARTO RMT system ( Stereotaxis Inc. ) . End point of ablation was voltage abatement > 90 % of bipolar electrogram amplitude . RESULTS Remote ablation was successful in 38 of 40 patients without complications . The median mapping and ablation time was 152.5 min ( range , 90 to 380 min ) but was much longer in the first 12 patients ( 192.5 min vs. 148 min ; p = 0.012 ) . Median ablation time was 49.5 min ( range , 17 to 154 min ) , but it was much shorter in the last 28 patients than in the first 12 patients ( 49 min vs. 70 min ; p = 0.021 ) . Patients receiving remote ablation had longer procedure times than control patients ( p < 0.001 ) with similar mapping time but shorter ablation time on right-sided pulmonary veins . Many more mapping points regardless of their location were collected remotely ( p < 0.001 ) . CONCLUSIONS Remote magnetic navigation for AF ablation is safe and feasible with a short learning curve . Although all procedures were performed by a highly experienced operator , remote AF ablation can be performed even by less experienced operators
There is limited evidence to suggest which ablation method was the best .
There is limited evidence to suggest that CA may be a better treatment option compared to medical therapies in the management of persistent AF .
This review was also unable to recommend the best CA method
BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia seen in cardiovascular departments .
Treatments include medical interventions and catheter ablation .
Due to uncertainties in medical therapies for AF , and the need to continue sinus rhythm , ablation has been recently considered as a viable alternative .
Many new ablation methods based on pulmonary vein isolation ( PVI ) have been developed .
OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this review was to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of  catheter ablation ( CA ) in comparison with medical treatment in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF .
The secondary objective was to determine the best regimen of CA .