Caroline H Roney1,2, Jason D Bayer1,2, Sohail Zahid3, Marianna Meo1,4, Patrick M J Boyle3, Natalia A Trayanova3, Michel Haïssaguerre1,4,5, Rémi Dubois1,4, Hubert Cochet1,4,6, Edward J Vigmond1,2. 1. IHU Liryc, Electrophysiology and Heart Modeling Institute, foundation Bordeaux Université, F-33600 Pessac- Bordeaux, France. 2. Univ. Bordeaux, IMB UMR 5251, CNRS, F-33400 Talence, France. 3. Department of Biomedical Engineering and Institute for Computational Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Univ. Bordeaux, Centre de recherche Cardio-Thoracique de Bordeaux, U1045, F- 33000, Bordeaux, France. 5. Bordeaux University Hospital (CHU), Electrophysiology and Ablation Unit, F-33600 Pessac, France. 6. Department of Cardiac Imaging, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France.
Abstract
AIMS: Catheter ablation is an effective technique for terminating atrial arrhythmia. However, given a high atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence rate, optimal ablation strategies have yet to be defined. Computer modelling can be a powerful aid but modelling of fibrosis, a major factor associated with AF, is an open question. Several groups have proposed methodologies based on imaging data, but no comparison to determine which methodology best corroborates clinically observed reentrant behaviour has been performed. We examined several methodologies to determine the best method for capturing fibrillation dynamics. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patient late gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data were transferred onto a bilayer atrial computer model and used to assign fibrosis distributions. Fibrosis was modelled as conduction disturbances (lower conductivity, edge splitting, or percolation), transforming growth factor-β1 ionic channel effects, myocyte-fibroblast coupling, and combinations of the preceding. Reentry was induced through pulmonary vein ectopy and the ensuing rotor dynamics characterized. Non-invasive electrocardiographic imaging data of the patients in AF was used for comparison. Electrograms were computed and the fractionation durations measured over the surface. Edge splitting produced more phase singularities from wavebreaks than the other representations. The number of phase singularities seen with percolation was closer to the clinical values. Addition of fibroblast coupling had an organizing effect on rotor dynamics. Simple tissue conductivity changes with ionic changes localized rotors over fibrosis which was not observed with clinical data. CONCLUSION: The specific representation of fibrosis has a large effect on rotor dynamics and needs to be carefully considered for patient specific modelling. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: Catheter ablation is an effective technique for terminating atrial arrhythmia. However, given a high atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence rate, optimal ablation strategies have yet to be defined. Computer modelling can be a powerful aid but modelling of fibrosis, a major factor associated with AF, is an open question. Several groups have proposed methodologies based on imaging data, but no comparison to determine which methodology best corroborates clinically observed reentrant behaviour has been performed. We examined several methodologies to determine the best method for capturing fibrillation dynamics. METHODS AND RESULTS:Patient late gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data were transferred onto a bilayer atrial computer model and used to assign fibrosis distributions. Fibrosis was modelled as conduction disturbances (lower conductivity, edge splitting, or percolation), transforming growth factor-β1 ionic channel effects, myocyte-fibroblast coupling, and combinations of the preceding. Reentry was induced through pulmonary vein ectopy and the ensuing rotor dynamics characterized. Non-invasive electrocardiographic imaging data of the patients in AF was used for comparison. Electrograms were computed and the fractionation durations measured over the surface. Edge splitting produced more phase singularities from wavebreaks than the other representations. The number of phase singularities seen with percolation was closer to the clinical values. Addition of fibroblast coupling had an organizing effect on rotor dynamics. Simple tissue conductivity changes with ionic changes localized rotors over fibrosis which was not observed with clinical data. CONCLUSION: The specific representation of fibrosis has a large effect on rotor dynamics and needs to be carefully considered for patient specific modelling. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Simon Labarthe; Jason Bayer; Yves Coudière; Jacques Henry; Hubert Cochet; Pierre Jaïs; Edward Vigmond Journal: Europace Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Arne Defauw; Nele Vandersickel; Peter Dawyndt; Alexander V Panfilov Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2014-09-12 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: David E Krummen; Jason D Bayer; Jeffrey Ho; Gordon Ho; Miriam R Smetak; Paul Clopton; Natalia A Trayanova; Sanjiv M Narayan Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2012-10-01
Authors: Jonathan Chrispin; Esra Gucuk Ipek; Sohail Zahid; Adityo Prakosa; Mohammadali Habibi; David Spragg; Joseph E Marine; Hiroshi Ashikaga; John Rickard; Natalia A Trayanova; Stefan L Zimmerman; Vadim Zipunnikov; Ronald D Berger; Hugh Calkins; Saman Nazarian Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2015-11-10 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: Robert S Oakes; Troy J Badger; Eugene G Kholmovski; Nazem Akoum; Nathan S Burgon; Eric N Fish; Joshua J E Blauer; Swati N Rao; Edward V R DiBella; Nathan M Segerson; Marcos Daccarett; Jessiciah Windfelder; Christopher J McGann; Dennis Parker; Rob S MacLeod; Nassir F Marrouche Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-03-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Richard H Clayton; Yasser Aboelkassem; Chris D Cantwell; Cesare Corrado; Tammo Delhaas; Wouter Huberts; Chon Lok Lei; Haibo Ni; Alexander V Panfilov; Caroline Roney; Rodrigo Weber Dos Santos Journal: Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci Date: 2020-05-25 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Max Falkenberg; David Hickey; Louie Terrill; Alberto Ciacci; Nicholas S Peters; Kim Christensen Journal: Comput Cardiol (2010) Date: 2019-11-08
Authors: Rheeda L Ali; Joe B Hakim; Patrick M Boyle; Sohail Zahid; Bhradeev Sivasambu; Joseph E Marine; Hugh Calkins; Natalia A Trayanova; David D Spragg Journal: Cardiovasc Res Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 10.787
Authors: Patrick M Boyle; William H Franceschi; Marion Constantin; Claudia Hawks; Thomas Desplantez; Natalia A Trayanova; Edward J Vigmond Journal: J Mol Cell Cardiol Date: 2019-01-22 Impact factor: 5.000
Authors: Patrick M Boyle; Michael J Murphy; Thomas V Karathanos; Sohail Zahid; Robert C Blake; Natalia A Trayanova Journal: J Physiol Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 5.182