BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Left ventricular electromechanical mapping (EMM) determines myocardial viability on the basis of endocardial electrograms. The aim of the present study was to validate EMM in differentiating infarcted myocardium from viable myocardium by histopathological analysis. METHODS: Sixty days after implanting an ameroid constrictor over the left circumflex artery to create chronic ischemia in 19 pigs, EMM was performed to construct unipolar voltage (UPV), bipolar voltage (BPV) and linear local shortening (LLS) maps. Noninfarcted and infarcted myocardium were identified by histopathology. Threshold determinations comparing noninfarcted tissue with scarred tissue were made by measuring the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: From the 19 hearts, 149 myocardial segments were divided into noninfarcted myocardium (n=128) and transmural infarct (n=21). UPV, BPV and LLS values (4.7+/-1.2 mV, 2.8+/-2.5 mV and 10.0+/-5.1%, respectively) of infarcted segments were significantly lower than those in noninfarcted myocardium (10.9+/-3.4 mV, 4.5+/-2.4 mV and 15.7+/-9.5%, respectively; P<0.01 for each comparison). The threshold values of UPV, BPV and LLS differentiating noninfarcted from infarcted myocardium were 6.2 mV (98% sensitivity, 95% specificity, 97% accuracy), 2.8 mV (80% sensitivity, 72% specificity, 79% accuracy) and 12.3% (68% sensitivity, 67% specificity, 68% accuracy), respectively. The relative dispersion of voltage was lower for UPV versus BPV. CONCLUSION: UPV can accurately differentiate infarcted from noninfarcted tissue in the chronic ischemic heart of pigs; however, BPV and LLS results were less accurate.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Left ventricular electromechanical mapping (EMM) determines myocardial viability on the basis of endocardial electrograms. The aim of the present study was to validate EMM in differentiating infarcted myocardium from viable myocardium by histopathological analysis. METHODS: Sixty days after implanting an ameroid constrictor over the left circumflex artery to create chronic ischemia in 19 pigs, EMM was performed to construct unipolar voltage (UPV), bipolar voltage (BPV) and linear local shortening (LLS) maps. Noninfarcted and infarcted myocardium were identified by histopathology. Threshold determinations comparing noninfarcted tissue with scarred tissue were made by measuring the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: From the 19 hearts, 149 myocardial segments were divided into noninfarcted myocardium (n=128) and transmural infarct (n=21). UPV, BPV and LLS values (4.7+/-1.2 mV, 2.8+/-2.5 mV and 10.0+/-5.1%, respectively) of infarcted segments were significantly lower than those in noninfarcted myocardium (10.9+/-3.4 mV, 4.5+/-2.4 mV and 15.7+/-9.5%, respectively; P<0.01 for each comparison). The threshold values of UPV, BPV and LLS differentiating noninfarcted from infarcted myocardium were 6.2 mV (98% sensitivity, 95% specificity, 97% accuracy), 2.8 mV (80% sensitivity, 72% specificity, 79% accuracy) and 12.3% (68% sensitivity, 67% specificity, 68% accuracy), respectively. The relative dispersion of voltage was lower for UPV versus BPV. CONCLUSION: UPV can accurately differentiate infarcted from noninfarcted tissue in the chronic ischemic heart of pigs; however, BPV and LLS results were less accurate.
Authors: H E Bøtker; J F Lassen; F Hermansen; H Wiggers; P Søgaard; W Y Kim; M Bøttcher; L Thuesen; A K Pedersen Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-03-27 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Waren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Emerson C Perin; Guilherme V Silva; Rogerio Sarmento-Leite; William K Vaughn; R David Fish; James J Ferguson Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Dongming Hou; Eyas Al-Shaykh Youssef; Todd J Brinton; Ping Zhang; Pamela Rogers; Erik T Price; Alan C Yeung; Brian H Johnstone; Paul G Yock; Keith L March Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-08-30 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Shyam Bhakta; Nicholas J Greco; Marcie R Finney; Paul E Scheid; Robert D Hoffman; Matthew E Joseph; Jason J Banks; Mary J Laughlin; Vincent J Pompili Journal: J Invasive Cardiol Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 2.022
Authors: T Wolf; L Gepstein; U Dror; G Hayam; R Shofti; A Zaretzky; G Uretzky; U Oron; S A Ben-Haim Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: P Perrone-Filardi; L Pace; M Prastaro; F Squame; S Betocchi; A Soricelli; F Piscione; C Indolfi; T Crisci; M Salvatore; M Chiariello Journal: Circulation Date: 1996-12-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mathew D Hutchinson; Edward P Gerstenfeld; Benoit Desjardins; Rupa Bala; Michael P Riley; Fermin C Garcia; Sanjay Dixit; David Lin; Wendy S Tzou; Joshua M Cooper; Ralph J Verdino; David J Callans; Francis E Marchlinski Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2010-12-03
Authors: Emerson C Perin; Mei Tian; Frank C Marini; Guilherme V Silva; Yi Zheng; Fred Baimbridge; Xin Quan; Marlos R Fernandes; Amir Gahremanpour; Daniel Young; Vincenzo Paolillo; Uday Mukhopadhyay; Agatha T Borne; Rajesh Uthamanthil; David Brammer; James Jackson; William K Decker; Amer M Najjar; Michael W Thomas; Andrei Volgin; Brian Rabinovich; Suren Soghomonyan; Hwan-Jeong Jeong; Jesse M Rios; David Steiner; Simon Robinson; Osama Mawlawi; Tinsu Pan; Jason Stafford; Vikas Kundra; Chun Li; Mian M Alauddin; James T Willerson; Elizabeth Shpall; Juri G Gelovani Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-09-01 Impact factor: 3.240