AIMS: During epicardial electroanatomical mapping (EAM), it is difficult to differentiate between fibrosis and fat, as both exhibit attenuated bipolar voltage (BV). The purpose of this study was to assess whether unipolar voltage (UV), BV, and electrogram characteristics (EC) can distinguish fibrosis from viable myocardium and fat during epicardial EAM for ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). METHODS AND RESULTS: Ten NICM patients (7 males, 56 ± 13 years) with VT underwent epicardial EAM with real-time integration of computed tomography-derived epicardial fat and contrast-enhanced MRI-derived scar. Bipolar voltage (filtered 30-400 Hz), UV (filtered 1-240 Hz), and EC (duration and morphology) were correlated with the presence of fat and scar. At sites devoid of fat, the optimal cutoff values to differentiate between scar and myocardium were 1.81 mV for BV and 7.95 mV for UV. Bipolar voltage, UV, and electrogram duration >50 ms distinguished scar from myocardium in areas covered with <2.8 mm fat (all P < 0.001), but not ≥ 2.8 mm fat. In contrast, electrogram morphology-characteristics could also detect scar covered with ≥ 2.8 mm fat (P = 0.001). A newly developed three-step algorithm combining electrogram morphology, duration, and UV could correctly identify scar with a sensitivity of 75%. Unipolar voltage but not BV could detect intramural scar in the absence of fat. CONCLUSIONS: Both BV ≤ 1.81 mV and UV ≤ 7.95 mV are useful for detection of scar during epicardial EAM, in the absence of ≥ 2.8 mm fat. However, EC can be used to detect scar covered with fat. A newly developed algorithm combining UV and EC can differentiate between scar and viable myocardium. Unipolar voltage but not BV could detect intramural scar.
AIMS: During epicardial electroanatomical mapping (EAM), it is difficult to differentiate between fibrosis and fat, as both exhibit attenuated bipolar voltage (BV). The purpose of this study was to assess whether unipolar voltage (UV), BV, and electrogram characteristics (EC) can distinguish fibrosis from viable myocardium and fat during epicardial EAM for ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). METHODS AND RESULTS: Ten NICM patients (7 males, 56 ± 13 years) with VT underwent epicardial EAM with real-time integration of computed tomography-derived epicardial fat and contrast-enhanced MRI-derived scar. Bipolar voltage (filtered 30-400 Hz), UV (filtered 1-240 Hz), and EC (duration and morphology) were correlated with the presence of fat and scar. At sites devoid of fat, the optimal cutoff values to differentiate between scar and myocardium were 1.81 mV for BV and 7.95 mV for UV. Bipolar voltage, UV, and electrogram duration >50 ms distinguished scar from myocardium in areas covered with <2.8 mm fat (all P < 0.001), but not ≥ 2.8 mm fat. In contrast, electrogram morphology-characteristics could also detect scar covered with ≥ 2.8 mm fat (P = 0.001). A newly developed three-step algorithm combining electrogram morphology, duration, and UV could correctly identify scar with a sensitivity of 75%. Unipolar voltage but not BV could detect intramural scar in the absence of fat. CONCLUSIONS: Both BV ≤ 1.81 mV and UV ≤ 7.95 mV are useful for detection of scar during epicardial EAM, in the absence of ≥ 2.8 mm fat. However, EC can be used to detect scar covered with fat. A newly developed algorithm combining UV and EC can differentiate between scar and viable myocardium. Unipolar voltage but not BV could detect intramural scar.
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Saenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Qian Tao; Sebastiaan R D Piers; Hildo J Lamb; Katja Zeppenfeld; Rob J van der Geest Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Sáenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: Europace Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Mariña López-Yunta; Daniel G León; José Manuel Alfonso-Almazán; Manuel Marina-Breysse; Jorge G Quintanilla; Javier Sánchez-González; Carlos Galán-Arriola; Victoria Cañadas-Godoy; Daniel Enríquez-Vázquez; Carlos Torres; Borja Ibáñez; Julián Pérez-Villacastín; Nicasio Pérez-Castellano; José Jalife; Mariano Vázquez; Jazmín Aguado-Sierra; David Filgueiras-Rama Journal: Europace Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Uyên Châu Nguyên; Francesco Maffessanti; Masih Mafi-Rad; Giulio Conte; Stef Zeemering; François Regoli; Maria Luce Caputo; Antonius M W van Stipdonk; Sebastiaan C A M Bekkers; Daniel Suerder; Tiziano Moccetti; Rolf Krause; Frits W Prinzen; Kevin Vernooy; Angelo Auricchio Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-07-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Neil T Srinivasan; Michele Orini; Rui Providencia; Mehul B Dhinoja; Martin D Lowe; Syed Y Ahsan; Anthony W Chow; Ross J Hunter; Richard J Schilling; Peter Taggart; Pier D Lambiase Journal: Europace Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 5.214