BACKGROUND: Complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE) are targets of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Serial high-density maps were evaluated to understand the impact of activation direction and rate on electrogram (EGM) fractionation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eighteen patients (9 persistent) underwent high-density, 3-dimensional, left-atrial mapping (>400 points/map) during AF, sinus (SR), and CS-paced (CSp) rhythms. In SR and CSp, fractionation was defined as an EGM with ≥4 deflections, although, in AF, CFE-mean <80 ms was considered as continuous CFAE. The anatomic distribution of CFAE sites was assessed, quantified, and correlated between rhythms. Mechanisms underlying fractionation were investigated by analysis of voltage, activation, and propagation maps. A minority of continuous CFAE sites displayed EGM fractionation in SR (15+/-4%) and CSp (12+/-8%). EGM fractionation did not match between SR and CSp at 70+/-10% sites. Activation maps in SR and CSp showed that wave collision (71%) and regional slow conduction (24%) caused EGM fractionation. EGM voltage during AF (0.59+/-0.58 mV) was lower than during SR and CSp (>1.0 mV) at all sites. During AF, the EGM voltage was higher at continuous CFAE sites than at non-CFAE sites (0.53 mV (Q1, Q3: 0.33 to 0.83) versus 0.30 mV (Q1, Q3: 0.18 to 0.515), P<0.00001). Global LA voltage in AF was lower in patients with persistent AF versus patients with paroxysmal AF (0.6+/-0.59 mV versus 1.12+/-1.32 mV, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of fractionated EGMs is highly variable, depending on direction and rate of activation (SR versus CSp versus AF). Fractionation in SR and CSp rhythms mostly resulted from wave collision. All sites with continuous fractionation in AF displayed normal voltage in SR, suggesting absence of structural scar. Thus, many fractionated EGMs are functional in nature, and their sites dynamic.
BACKGROUND: Complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE) are targets of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Serial high-density maps were evaluated to understand the impact of activation direction and rate on electrogram (EGM) fractionation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eighteen patients (9 persistent) underwent high-density, 3-dimensional, left-atrial mapping (>400 points/map) during AF, sinus (SR), and CS-paced (CSp) rhythms. In SR and CSp, fractionation was defined as an EGM with ≥4 deflections, although, in AF, CFE-mean <80 ms was considered as continuous CFAE. The anatomic distribution of CFAE sites was assessed, quantified, and correlated between rhythms. Mechanisms underlying fractionation were investigated by analysis of voltage, activation, and propagation maps. A minority of continuous CFAE sites displayed EGM fractionation in SR (15+/-4%) and CSp (12+/-8%). EGM fractionation did not match between SR and CSp at 70+/-10% sites. Activation maps in SR and CSp showed that wave collision (71%) and regional slow conduction (24%) caused EGM fractionation. EGM voltage during AF (0.59+/-0.58 mV) was lower than during SR and CSp (>1.0 mV) at all sites. During AF, the EGM voltage was higher at continuous CFAE sites than at non-CFAE sites (0.53 mV (Q1, Q3: 0.33 to 0.83) versus 0.30 mV (Q1, Q3: 0.18 to 0.515), P<0.00001). Global LA voltage in AF was lower in patients with persistent AF versus patients with paroxysmal AF (0.6+/-0.59 mV versus 1.12+/-1.32 mV, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of fractionated EGMs is highly variable, depending on direction and rate of activation (SR versus CSp versus AF). Fractionation in SR and CSp rhythms mostly resulted from wave collision. All sites with continuous fractionation in AF displayed normal voltage in SR, suggesting absence of structural scar. Thus, many fractionated EGMs are functional in nature, and their sites dynamic.
Authors: R J Hunter; T J Berriman; I Diab; V Baker; M Finlay; L Richmond; E Duncan; R Kamdar; G Thomas; D Abrams; M Dhinoja; S Sporton; M J Earley; R J Schilling Journal: Heart Date: 2010-05-18 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Sanjiv M Narayan; Matthew Wright; Nicolas Derval; Amir Jadidi; Andrei Forclaz; Isabelle Nault; Shinsuke Miyazaki; Frédéric Sacher; Pierre Bordachar; Jacques Clémenty; Pierre Jaïs; Michel Haïssaguerre; Mélèze Hocini Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2010-10-16 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Anthony Aizer; Douglas S Holmes; Ann C Garlitski; Neil E Bernstein; Jane M Smyth-Melsky; Aileen M Ferrick; Larry A Chinitz Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2008-05-02 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Hakan Oral; Aman Chugh; Kentaro Yoshida; Jean F Sarrazin; Michael Kuhne; Thomas Crawford; Nagib Chalfoun; Darryl Wells; Warangkna Boonyapisit; Srikar Veerareddy; Sreedhar Billakanty; Wai S Wong; Eric Good; Krit Jongnarangsin; Frank Pelosi; Frank Bogun; Fred Morady Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-03-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Yoshihide Takahashi; Mark D O'Neill; Mélèze Hocini; Rémi Dubois; Seiichiro Matsuo; Sébastien Knecht; Srijoy Mahapatra; Kang-Teng Lim; Pierre Jaïs; Anders Jonsson; Frédéric Sacher; Prashanthan Sanders; Thomas Rostock; Pierre Bordachar; Jacques Clémenty; George J Klein; Michel Haïssaguerre Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-03-11 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Edward J Ciaccio; Angelo B Biviano; Alok Gambhir; Jason T Jacobson; Hasan Garan Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2013-08-26 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: Christian Sohns; Ardan M Saguner; Christine Lemes; Francesco Santoro; Shibu Mathew; Christian Heeger; Bruno Reißmann; Tilman Maurer; Johannes Riedl; Thomas Fink; Kentaro Hayashi; Feifan Ouyang; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Andreas Metzner Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2016-06-11 Impact factor: 5.460