INTRODUCTION: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the left atrium (LA) can be integrated with electroanatomic mapping systems to guide catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). The usefulness of this technique is dependent on the accuracy of image integration. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the effect of heart rhythm at the time of pre-procedure MR imaging and heart rhythm at the time of ablation on integration error. METHODS: Fifty-two consecutive patients who underwent catheter ablation for AF were included. All patients underwent MR imaging of LA and pulmonary veins and image integration with real-time electroanatomic mapping. The rhythm at the time of MR imaging and on the day of ablation was recorded. CARTO-Merge software (Biosense-Webster) was used to calculate the average accuracy of integration of electroanatomic points with MR-derived reconstructions. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in integration error between patients who were in AF at the time of their MR vs. those who were in sinus rhythm at the time of their MR (1.76 +/- 0.26 vs. 1.88 +/- 0.31 mm, p = 0.15). There was also no significant difference in integration error between patients who were in concordant vs. discordant rhythms at the time of MR vs. day of ablation (1.81 +/- 0.23 vs. 1.89 +/- 0.32 mm, p = 0.40). There was a trend toward less integration error between patients who were in AF on the day of ablation vs. those in sinus rhythm (1.74 +/- 0.26 vs. 1.89 +/- 0.31 mm, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Image integration can be performed to direct catheter ablation of AF regardless of the rhythm at the time of imaging and ablation.
INTRODUCTION: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the left atrium (LA) can be integrated with electroanatomic mapping systems to guide catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). The usefulness of this technique is dependent on the accuracy of image integration. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the effect of heart rhythm at the time of pre-procedure MR imaging and heart rhythm at the time of ablation on integration error. METHODS: Fifty-two consecutive patients who underwent catheter ablation for AF were included. All patients underwent MR imaging of LA and pulmonary veins and image integration with real-time electroanatomic mapping. The rhythm at the time of MR imaging and on the day of ablation was recorded. CARTO-Merge software (Biosense-Webster) was used to calculate the average accuracy of integration of electroanatomic points with MR-derived reconstructions. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in integration error between patients who were in AF at the time of their MR vs. those who were in sinus rhythm at the time of their MR (1.76 +/- 0.26 vs. 1.88 +/- 0.31 mm, p = 0.15). There was also no significant difference in integration error between patients who were in concordant vs. discordant rhythms at the time of MR vs. day of ablation (1.81 +/- 0.23 vs. 1.89 +/- 0.32 mm, p = 0.40). There was a trend toward less integration error between patients who were in AF on the day of ablation vs. those in sinus rhythm (1.74 +/- 0.26 vs. 1.89 +/- 0.31 mm, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Image integration can be performed to direct catheter ablation of AF regardless of the rhythm at the time of imaging and ablation.
Authors: Jun Dong; Hugh Calkins; Stephen B Solomon; Shenghan Lai; Darshan Dalal; Albert C Lardo; Al Lardo; Erez Brem; Assaf Preiss; Ronald D Berger; Henry Halperin; Timm Dickfeld Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-01-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: E Kevin Heist; Jianping Chevalier; Godtfred Holmvang; Jagmeet P Singh; Patrick T Ellinor; David J Milan; Andre D'Avila; Theofanie Mela; Jeremy N Ruskin; Moussa Mansour Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2007-01-25 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Michel Haïssaguerre; Mélèze Hocini; Prashanthan Sanders; Frederic Sacher; Martin Rotter; Yoshihide Takahashi; Thomas Rostock; Li-Fern Hsu; Pierre Bordachar; Sylvain Reuter; Raymond Roudaut; Jacques Clémenty; Pierre Jaïs Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2005-11
Authors: M Haïssaguerre; D C Shah; P Jaïs; M Hocini; T Yamane; I Deisenhofer; M Chauvin; S Garrigue; J Clémenty Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-11-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: C Pappone; G Oreto; F Lamberti; G Vicedomini; M L Loricchio; S Shpun; M Rillo; M P Calabrò; A Conversano; S A Ben-Haim; R Cappato; S Chierchia Journal: Circulation Date: 1999-09-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Oussama M Wazni; Salwa Beheiry; Tamer Fahmy; Conor Barrett; Steven Hao; Dimpi Patel; Luigi Di Biase; David O Martin; Mohamed Kanj; Mauricio Arruda; Jennifer Cummings; Robert Schweikert; Walid Saliba; Andrea Natale Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Hakan Oral; Christoph Scharf; Aman Chugh; Burr Hall; Peter Cheung; Eric Good; Srikar Veerareddy; Frank Pelosi; Fred Morady Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-10-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jun Dong; Darshan Dalal; Daniel Scherr; Aamir Cheema; Saman Nazarian; Kenneth Bilchick; Ibrahim Almasry; Alan Cheng; Charles A Henrikson; David Spragg; Joseph E Marine; Ronald D Berger; Hugh Calkins Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2007-09-11
Authors: Roy Beinart; Rajesh Kabra; Kevin E Heist; Dan Blendea; Conor D Barrett; Stephan B Danik; Ryan Collins; Jeremy N Ruskin; Moussa Mansour Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Jason E Taclas; Reza Nezafat; John V Wylie; Mark E Josephson; Jeff Hsing; Warren J Manning; Dana C Peters Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2009-12-13 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Caroline H Roney; Charles Sillett; John Whitaker; Jose Alonso Solis Lemus; Iain Sim; Irum Kotadia; Mark O'Neill; Steven E Williams; Steven A Niederer Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-12-18 Impact factor: 6.875