BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Recent advances in multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) have allowed an improved analysis of left atrial (LA) and left atrial appendage (LAA) anatomy prior to catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). However, data regarding the ability of MSCT to identify LA/LAA thrombus are limited. This prospective study compared the efficacy of 64-slice contrast-enhanced computed tomography (64CCT) with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) of the heart in the identification of LA/LAA thrombus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred and seventy consecutive patients scheduled for first-time catheter ablation of paroxysmal (n = 120) or persistent (n = 50) AF were enrolled for study. Each patient underwent non-gated 64CCT and TEE of the heart for exclusion of LA/LAA thrombus prior to ablation procedure. RESULTS: Fourteen cases (8.2%) of LA/LAA thrombi were interpreted by 64CCT (ten false-positive, four true positive), whereas 11 actual thrombi (6.5%) were detected by TEE (seven false-negative by 64CCT) in the same population. Maximal dimension of TEE identified thrombi did not differ between the false-negative by 64CCT group and the true-positive group (17 +/- 6 vs. 18 +/- 5 mm P = 0.677). Results indicated 64CCT sensitivity = 36.4%, specificity = 93.7%, positive predictive value = 28.6%, and negative predictive value = 95.5% in the detection of LA/LAA thrombus. The Kappa value in evaluating the agreement between 64CCT and TEE for detection of LA/LAA thrombus was 0.267. CONCLUSION: Compared to gold standard TEE, 64CCT was shown to be less reliable in the detection of LA/LAA thrombus prior to catheter ablation in patients with AF.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Recent advances in multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) have allowed an improved analysis of left atrial (LA) and left atrial appendage (LAA) anatomy prior to catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). However, data regarding the ability of MSCT to identify LA/LAA thrombus are limited. This prospective study compared the efficacy of 64-slice contrast-enhanced computed tomography (64CCT) with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) of the heart in the identification of LA/LAA thrombus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred and seventy consecutive patients scheduled for first-time catheter ablation of paroxysmal (n = 120) or persistent (n = 50) AF were enrolled for study. Each patient underwent non-gated 64CCT and TEE of the heart for exclusion of LA/LAA thrombus prior to ablation procedure. RESULTS: Fourteen cases (8.2%) of LA/LAA thrombi were interpreted by 64CCT (ten false-positive, four true positive), whereas 11 actual thrombi (6.5%) were detected by TEE (seven false-negative by 64CCT) in the same population. Maximal dimension of TEE identified thrombi did not differ between the false-negative by 64CCT group and the true-positive group (17 +/- 6 vs. 18 +/- 5 mm P = 0.677). Results indicated 64CCT sensitivity = 36.4%, specificity = 93.7%, positive predictive value = 28.6%, and negative predictive value = 95.5% in the detection of LA/LAA thrombus. The Kappa value in evaluating the agreement between 64CCT and TEE for detection of LA/LAA thrombus was 0.267. CONCLUSION: Compared to gold standard TEE, 64CCT was shown to be less reliable in the detection of LA/LAA thrombus prior to catheter ablation in patients with AF.
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Josep Brugada; Douglas L Packer; Riccardo Cappato; Shih-Ann Chen; Harry J G Crijns; Ralph J Damiano; D Wyn Davies; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Yoshito Iesaka; Warren Jackman; Pierre Jais; Hans Kottkamp; Karl Heinz Kuck; Bruce D Lindsay; Francis E Marchlinski; Patrick M McCarthy; J Lluis Mont; Fred Morady; Koonlawee Nademanee; Andrea Natale; Carlo Pappone; Eric Prystowsky; Antonio Raviele; Jeremy N Ruskin; Richard J Shemin Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2007-04-30 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Jun Dong; Timm Dickfeld; Darshan Dalal; Aamir Cheema; Chandrasekhar R Vasamreddy; Charles A Henrikson; Joseph E Marine; Henry R Halperin; Ronald D Berger; Joao A C Lima; David A Bluemke; Hugh Calkins Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2006-05
Authors: Peter M Kistler; Mark J Earley; Stuart Harris; Dominic Abrams; Stephen Ellis; Simon C Sporton; Richard J Schilling Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2006-04
Authors: Wael A Jaber; Richard D White; Stacie A Kuzmiak; Janet M Boyle; Andrea Natale; Carolyn Apperson-Hansen; James D Thomas; Craig R Asher Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2004-02-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Olga Lazoura; Tevfik F Ismail; Christopher Pavitt; Alistair Lindsay; Mona Sriharan; Michael Rubens; Simon Padley; Alison Duncan; Tom Wong; Edward Nicol Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-09-29 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Suraj Kapa; Matthew W Martinez; Eric E Williamson; Steve R Ommen; Imran S Syed; DaLi Feng; Douglas L Packer; Peter A Brady Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2010-09-01 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: F Zoppo; G Brandolino; A Berton; N Frigato; M Michieletto; A Zanocco; F Zerbo; E Bacchiega; A Lupo; E Bertaglia Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2012-08-07 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Kenneth C Bilchick; Augustus Mealor; Jorge Gonzalez; Patrick Norton; David Zhuo; Pamela Mason; John D Ferguson; Rohit Malhotra; J Michael Mangrum; Andrew E Darby; John DiMarco; Klaus Hagspiel; John Dent; Christopher M Kramer; George J Stukenborg; Michael Salerno Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2015-09-01 Impact factor: 6.343