BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping (EAM) is routinely used to mark ablated areas during radiofrequency ablation. We hypothesized that, in atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, EAM overestimates scar formation in the left atrium (LA) when compared to the scar seen on late-gadolinium enhancement magnetic resonance imaging (LGE-MRI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Of the 235 patients who underwent initial ablation for AF at our institution between August 2011 and December 2012, we retrospectively identified 70 patients who had preprocedural magnetic resonance angiography merged with LA anatomy in EAM software and had a 3-month postablation LGE-MRI for assessment of scar. Ablated area was marked intraprocedurally using EAM software and quantified retrospectively. Scarred area was quantified in 3-month postablation LGE-MRI. The mean ablated area in EAM was 30.5 ± 7.5% of the LA endocardial surface and the mean scarred area in LGE-MRI was 13.9 ± 5.9% (P < 0.001). This significant difference in the ablated area marked in the EAM and scar area in the LGE-MRI was present for each of the 3 independent operators. Complete pulmonary vein (PV) encirclement representing electrical isolation was observed in 87.8% of the PVs in EAM as compared to only 37.4% in LGE-MRI (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In AF ablation, EAM significantly overestimates the resultant scar as assessed with a follow-up LGE-MRI.
BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping (EAM) is routinely used to mark ablated areas during radiofrequency ablation. We hypothesized that, in atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, EAM overestimates scar formation in the left atrium (LA) when compared to the scar seen on late-gadolinium enhancement magnetic resonance imaging (LGE-MRI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Of the 235 patients who underwent initial ablation for AF at our institution between August 2011 and December 2012, we retrospectively identified 70 patients who had preprocedural magnetic resonance angiography merged with LA anatomy in EAM software and had a 3-month postablation LGE-MRI for assessment of scar. Ablated area was marked intraprocedurally using EAM software and quantified retrospectively. Scarred area was quantified in 3-month postablation LGE-MRI. The mean ablated area in EAM was 30.5 ± 7.5% of the LA endocardial surface and the mean scarred area in LGE-MRI was 13.9 ± 5.9% (P < 0.001). This significant difference in the ablated area marked in the EAM and scar area in the LGE-MRI was present for each of the 3 independent operators. Complete pulmonary vein (PV) encirclement representing electrical isolation was observed in 87.8% of the PVs in EAM as compared to only 37.4% in LGE-MRI (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In AF ablation, EAM significantly overestimates the resultant scar as assessed with a follow-up LGE-MRI.
Authors: A C Lardo; E R McVeigh; P Jumrussirikul; R D Berger; H Calkins; J Lima; H R Halperin Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-08-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Timm Dickfeld; Ritsushi Kato; Menekem Zviman; Saman Nazarian; Jun Dong; Hiroshi Ashikaga; Albert C Lardo; Ronald D Berger; Hugh Calkins; Henry Halperin Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2006-11-01 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: C Pappone; S Rosanio; G Oreto; M Tocchi; F Gugliotta; G Vicedomini; A Salvati; C Dicandia; P Mazzone; V Santinelli; S Gulletta; S Chierchia Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-11-21 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: M Haïssaguerre; P Jaïs; D C Shah; A Takahashi; M Hocini; G Quiniou; S Garrigue; A Le Mouroux; P Le Métayer; J Clémenty Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1998-09-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ravi Ranjan; Eugene G Kholmovski; Joshua Blauer; Sathya Vijayakumar; Nelly A Volland; Mohamed E Salama; Dennis L Parker; Rob MacLeod; Nassir F Marrouche Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2012-10-15
Authors: Christopher J McGann; Eugene G Kholmovski; Robert S Oakes; Joshua J E Blauer; Marcos Daccarett; Nathan Segerson; Kelly J Airey; Nazem Akoum; Eric Fish; Troy J Badger; Edward V R DiBella; Dennis Parker; Rob S MacLeod; Nassir F Marrouche Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-10-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Dana C Peters; John V Wylie; Thomas H Hauser; Kraig V Kissinger; René M Botnar; Vidal Essebag; Mark E Josephson; Warren J Manning Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Michael A Guttman; Susumu Tao; Sarah Fink; Rick Tunin; Ehud J Schmidt; Daniel A Herzka; Henry R Halperin; Aravindan Kolandaivelu Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-09-30 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Elena K Grant; Charles I Berul; Russell R Cross; Jeffrey P Moak; Karin S Hamann; Kohei Sumihara; Ileen Cronin; Kendall J O'Brien; Kanishka Ratnayaka; Michael S Hansen; Peter Kellman; Laura J Olivieri Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2017-03-28