Liang-Han Ling1, Alex J A McLellan1, Andrew J Taylor2, Leah M Iles2, Andris H Ellims2, Saurabh Kumar3, Andrew Teh1, Geoffrey Lee1, Michael C G Wong1, Sonia Azzopardi2, Michael A Sellenger2, Joseph B Morton3, Jonathan M Kalman3, Peter M Kistler4. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Alfred Hospital and Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Cardiology Department, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Victoria, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry, and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Alfred Hospital and Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Cardiology Department, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Victoria, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry, and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Alfred Hospital and Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry, and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: peter.kistler@bakeridi.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of diffuse atrial fibrosis detected by T1 mapping on the clinical outcome after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to validate and assess the impact of post-contrast cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging atrial T1 mapping on the clinical outcome after catheter ablation for AF. METHODS: CMR imaging was performed in 3 groups by using a clinical 1.5-T scanner: controls, patients with paroxysmal AF, and patients with persistent AF. A T1 mapping sequence was used to calculate the post-contrast T1 relaxation time (T1 time) at the interatrial septum as an index of diffuse atrial fibrosis. A subset underwent left atrial endocardial bipolar voltage mapping for electrophysiologic correlation. After AF ablation, patients underwent clinical review and 7-day Holter monitoring at 6-month intervals. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two patients (20 controls, 71 (63%) patients with paroxysmal AF, and 41 (37%) patients with persistent AF) underwent CMR imaging. Post-contrast atrial T1 time was significantly shorter in AF groups (237 ± 42 ms) than in controls (280 ± 37 ms) (P < .001). Post-contrast atrial T1 time correlated with mean septal voltage (R2 = .48; P < .001) and global left atrial voltage (R(2) = .41; P < .001). A diagnosis of AF, AF duration, and left ventricular end-diastolic volume independently predicted shortened post-contrast atrial T1 time. The single procedure success rate was 74% at 12 ± 5 months postablation. Post-contrast atrial T1 time was the only predictor of arrhythmia recurrence in multivariate analysis (P = .015). A post-contrast atrial T1 time of >230 ms was associated with freedom from AF in 85% relative to 62% with a post-contrast atrial T1 time of <230 ms (P = .01). CONCLUSION: Post-contrast atrial T1 time as measured using CMR imaging provides an index of atrial fibrosis that correlates with tissue voltage, presence of AF, and clinical outcomes after catheter ablation.
BACKGROUND: The impact of diffuse atrial fibrosis detected by T1 mapping on the clinical outcome after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to validate and assess the impact of post-contrast cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging atrial T1 mapping on the clinical outcome after catheter ablation for AF. METHODS: CMR imaging was performed in 3 groups by using a clinical 1.5-T scanner: controls, patients with paroxysmal AF, and patients with persistent AF. A T1 mapping sequence was used to calculate the post-contrast T1 relaxation time (T1 time) at the interatrial septum as an index of diffuse atrial fibrosis. A subset underwent left atrial endocardial bipolar voltage mapping for electrophysiologic correlation. After AF ablation, patients underwent clinical review and 7-day Holter monitoring at 6-month intervals. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two patients (20 controls, 71 (63%) patients with paroxysmal AF, and 41 (37%) patients with persistent AF) underwent CMR imaging. Post-contrast atrial T1 time was significantly shorter in AF groups (237 ± 42 ms) than in controls (280 ± 37 ms) (P < .001). Post-contrast atrial T1 time correlated with mean septal voltage (R2 = .48; P < .001) and global left atrial voltage (R(2) = .41; P < .001). A diagnosis of AF, AF duration, and left ventricular end-diastolic volume independently predicted shortened post-contrast atrial T1 time. The single procedure success rate was 74% at 12 ± 5 months postablation. Post-contrast atrial T1 time was the only predictor of arrhythmia recurrence in multivariate analysis (P = .015). A post-contrast atrial T1 time of >230 ms was associated with freedom from AF in 85% relative to 62% with a post-contrast atrial T1 time of <230 ms (P = .01). CONCLUSION: Post-contrast atrial T1 time as measured using CMR imaging provides an index of atrial fibrosis that correlates with tissue voltage, presence of AF, and clinical outcomes after catheter ablation.
Authors: Andreas Goette; Jonathan M Kalman; Luis Aguinaga; Joseph Akar; Jose Angel Cabrera; Shih Ann Chen; Sumeet S Chugh; Domenico Corradi; Andre D'Avila; Dobromir Dobrev; Guilherme Fenelon; Mario Gonzalez; Stephane N Hatem; Robert Helm; Gerhard Hindricks; Siew Yen Ho; Brian Hoit; Jose Jalife; Young-Hoon Kim; Gregory Y H Lip; Chang-Sheng Ma; Gregory M Marcus; Katherine Murray; Akihiko Nogami; Prashanthan Sanders; William Uribe; David R Van Wagoner; Stanley Nattel Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2016-06-10 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Jeffrey J Goldberger; Rishi Arora; David Green; Philip Greenland; Daniel C Lee; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Michael Markl; Jason Ng; Sanjiv J Shah Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-07-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Andreas Goette; Jonathan M Kalman; Luis Aguinaga; Joseph Akar; Jose Angel Cabrera; Shih Ann Chen; Sumeet S Chugh; Domenico Corradi; Andre D'Avila; Dobromir Dobrev; Guilherme Fenelon; Mario Gonzalez; Stephane N Hatem; Robert Helm; Gerhard Hindricks; Siew Yen Ho; Brian Hoit; Jose Jalife; Young-Hoon Kim; Gregory Y H Lip; Chang-Sheng Ma; Gregory M Marcus; Katherine Murray; Akihiko Nogami; Prashanthan Sanders; William Uribe; David R Van Wagoner; Stanley Nattel Journal: J Arrhythm Date: 2016-07-11
Authors: Morgane Evin; Kathryn M Broadhouse; Fraser M Callaghan; Rachel T McGrath; Sarah Glastras; Rebecca Kozor; Samantha L Hocking; Jérôme Lamy; Alban Redheuil; Nadjia Kachenoura; Greg R Fulcher; Gemma A Figtree; Stuart M Grieve Journal: Cardiovasc Diabetol Date: 2016-12-22 Impact factor: 9.951
Authors: Giulia Elena Mandoli; Flavio D'Ascenzi; Giulia Vinco; Giovanni Benfari; Fabrizio Ricci; Marta Focardi; Luna Cavigli; Maria Concetta Pastore; Nicolò Sisti; Oreste De Vivo; Ciro Santoro; Sergio Mondillo; Matteo Cameli Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2021-04-15
Authors: Jay A Montgomery; Wissam Abdallah; Zachary T Yoneda; Evan Brittain; Sam G Aznaurov; Babar Parvez; Keith Adkins; S Patrick Whalen; J C Estrada; Sharon Shen; George H Crossley; Arvindh Kanagasundram; Pablo Saavedra; Christopher R Ellis; Mark Lawson; Dawood Darbar; M Benjamin Shoemaker Journal: J Arrhythm Date: 2015-10-29
Authors: Julian A Luetkens; Anne C Wolpers; Thomas Beiert; Daniel Kuetting; Darius Dabir; Rami Homsi; Hendrik Meendermann; Natalie Abou Dayé; Vincent Knappe; Morten Karsdal; Signe H Nielsen; Federica Genovese; Florian Stöckigt; Markus Linhart; Daniel Thomas; Georg Nickenig; Hans H Schild; Jan W Schrickel; René P Andrié Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-09-11 Impact factor: 4.379