Literature DB >> 11011332

Evaluation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction with a nonfluoroscopic endoventricular three-dimensional mapping technique.

G Van Langenhove1, J N Hamburger, P C Smits, M Albertal, E Onderwater, I P Kay, P W Serruys.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recently, a novel nonfluoroscopic 3-dimensional electromechanical mapping technique was introduced in the clinical arena. Although initial in vitro and in vivo studies suggested the reliability of the system in volumetric and hemodynamic evaluation of the left ventricle, no validation in human beings has been performed.
METHODS: A nonfluoroscopic electromechanical mapping (NOGA, Biosense-Webster) procedure was performed in 44 patients. All patients received a contrast left ventriculogram during the same session. Volumetric (end-diastolic [EDV] and end-systolic volumes [ESV]) and hemodynamic (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] and stroke volume) parameters of both systems were compared.
RESULTS: Two uncomplicated pericardial effusions occurred with the first-generation mapping catheters. No procedural complications were noted with the new-generation mapping catheters. Significant correlations were found between mapping-derived and ventriculography-based measurements for both ESV (r = 0.67, P <.001) and LVEF (r = 0.78, P <.001). Absolute volumes, however, were only comparable for ESV (46.6 +/- 25.3 mL vs 48.8 +/- 37.0 mL, respectively; P =.13) but differed greatly for LVEF (35% +/- 13% vs 65% +/- 19%, respectively; P <.001), EDV (69.1 +/- 28.6 mL vs 125.9 +/- 53.4 mL, respectively; P <.001) and stroke volume (22.4 +/- 9.9 mL vs 77.1 +/- 33.7 respirations; P <.001). Moreover, Bland-Altman analysis showed the clinical noninterchangeability between these techniques for the measurement of hemodynamic parameters.
CONCLUSION: Measurement of hemodynamic parameters with nonfluoroscopic mapping of the left ventricle is feasible and safe. The system provides data that strongly correlate but that are in clinical disagreement with angiographic data. Therefore the interchangeability of these techniques may be questioned.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11011332     DOI: 10.1067/mhj.2000.108827

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Heart J        ISSN: 0002-8703            Impact factor:   4.749


  5 in total

Review 1.  Endoventricular electromechanical mapping-the diagnostic and therapeutic utility of the NOGA XP Cardiac Navigation System.

Authors:  Peter J Psaltis; Stephen G Worthley
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2008-12-10       Impact factor: 4.132

2.  Evaluation of global left ventricular function assessment of non-fluorescent electromechanical endocardial mapping compared with biplane left ventricular contrast angiography.

Authors:  E-S Tan; P A Van der Vleuten; G A J Jessurun; R A Tio; F Zijlstra; I C Van Gelder
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 2.380

3.  Unambiguous Identification and Visualization of an Acoustically Active Catheter by Ultrasound Imaging in Real Time: Theory, Algorithm, and Phantom Experiments.

Authors:  Viksit Kumar; Richard Liu; Randall R Kinnick; Adriana Gregory; Azra Alizad; Marek Belohlavek; Mostafa Fatemi
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 4.538

Review 4.  Diagnostic and prognostic value of 3D NOGA mapping in ischemic heart disease.

Authors:  Mariann Gyöngyösi; Nabil Dib
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2011-05-17       Impact factor: 32.419

5.  Comparison of left ventricular electromechanical mapping and left ventricular angiography: defining practical standards for analysis of NOGA maps.

Authors:  Rogerio Sarmento-Leite; Guilherme V Silva; Hans F R Dohman; Ricardo Mourilhe Rocha; Hans J F Dohman; Nelson Durval S G de Mattos; Luis Antonio Carvalho; Curios A M Gottechall; Emerson C Perin
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2003
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.