JACC. Clinical electrophysiology · 2022
Directed Graph Mapping for Ventricular Tachycardia: A Comparison to Established Mapping Techniques.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hawson Joshua, Van Nieuwenhuyse Enid, Van Den Abeele Robin, Al-Kaisey Ahmed, Anderson Robert D, Chieng David, Segan Louise, Watts Troy, Campbell Timothy, Hendrickx Sander, Morton Joseph, McLellan Alexander, Kistler Peter, Lee Adam, Gerstenfeld Edward P, Hsia Henry H, Voskoboinik Aleksander, Pathik Bhupesh, Kumar Saurabh, Kalman Jonathan, Lee Geoffrey, Vandersickel Nele
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Understanding underlying mechanism(s) and identifying critical circuit components are fundamental to successful ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation. Directed graph mapping (DGM) offers a novel technique to identify the mechanism and critical components of a VT circuit.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the accuracy of DGM in VT ablation compared with traditional mapping techniques and a commercially available automated conduction velocity mapping (ACVM) tool.
METHODS: Patients with structural heart disease who had undergone a VT ablation with entrainment-proven critical isthmus and a high-density electroanatomical activation map were included. Traditional mapping (TM) consisted of a combination of local activation time and entrainment mapping and was considered the gold standard for determining the VT mechanism, circuit, and isthmus location. The same local activation time values were then processed using DGM and a commercially available ACVM (Coherent Mapping, Biosense Webster) tool. The aim of this study was to compare TM vs DGM and ACVM in their ability to identify the VT mechanism, characterize the VT circuit, and locate the critical isthmus.
RESULTS: Thirty-five cases were identified. TM classified the VT mechanism as focal in 7 patients and re-entrant in 28 patients. TM classified 11 VTs as single-loop re-entry, 15 as dual-loop re-entry, 1 as complex, and 1 case was indeterminant. The overall agreement between DGM and TM for determining VT mechanism and circuit type was strong (kappa value = 0.79; P < 0.01), as was the agreement between ACVM and TM (kappa value = 0.66; P < 0.01). Both DGM and ACVM identified the putative VT isthmus in 25 (89%) of the re-entrant cases. Focal activation was correctly identified by both techniques in all cases.
CONCLUSIONS: DGM is a rapid automated algorithm that has a strong level of agreement with TM for manually re-annotated VT maps.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the accuracy of DGM in VT ablation compared with traditional mapping techniques and a commercially available automated conduction velocity mapping (ACVM) tool.
METHODS: Patients with structural heart disease who had undergone a VT ablation with entrainment-proven critical isthmus and a high-density electroanatomical activation map were included. Traditional mapping (TM) consisted of a combination of local activation time and entrainment mapping and was considered the gold standard for determining the VT mechanism, circuit, and isthmus location. The same local activation time values were then processed using DGM and a commercially available ACVM (Coherent Mapping, Biosense Webster) tool. The aim of this study was to compare TM vs DGM and ACVM in their ability to identify the VT mechanism, characterize the VT circuit, and locate the critical isthmus.
RESULTS: Thirty-five cases were identified. TM classified the VT mechanism as focal in 7 patients and re-entrant in 28 patients. TM classified 11 VTs as single-loop re-entry, 15 as dual-loop re-entry, 1 as complex, and 1 case was indeterminant. The overall agreement between DGM and TM for determining VT mechanism and circuit type was strong (kappa value = 0.79; P < 0.01), as was the agreement between ACVM and TM (kappa value = 0.66; P < 0.01). Both DGM and ACVM identified the putative VT isthmus in 25 (89%) of the re-entrant cases. Focal activation was correctly identified by both techniques in all cases.
CONCLUSIONS: DGM is a rapid automated algorithm that has a strong level of agreement with TM for manually re-annotated VT maps.