Results
The number of RF application [1 (1-3) vs 3 (1-6), p=0.0023], RF time [9.2 (2.0-95.7) vs 95.6 (4.1-248.7), p=0.0023], RF energy [248.4 (58.7-3328.2) vs 2867.6 (134.2-7728.4), p=0.0115] were significantly lower in dual chamber group. Fluoroscopy time [19.9 (14.2-26.1) vs 26.5 (17.7-43.4), p=0.0025], and fluoroscopy dose [52.5 (31.3-146.0) vs 119.0 (43.7-213.5), p=0.0249] were also significantly lower than in single chamber mapping group.