INTRODUCTION: Ventricular fibrillation is a common life-threatening arrhythmia. The ECG of VF appears chaotic but may allow identification of sustaining mechanisms to guide therapy. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that rotors and focal sources manifest distinct features on the ECG, and computational modeling may identify mechanisms of such features. METHODS: VF induction was attempted in 31 patients referred for ventricular arrhythmia ablation. Simultaneous surface ECG and intracardiac electrograms were recorded using biventricular basket catheters. Endocardial phase maps were used to mechanistically classify each VF cycle as rotor or focally driven. ECGs were analyzed from patients demonstrating both mechanisms in the primary analysis and from all patients with induced VF in the secondary analysis. The ECG voltage variation during each mechanism was compared. Biventricular computer simulations of VF driven by focal sources or rotors were created and resulting ECGs of each VF mechanism were compared. RESULTS: Rotor-based VF exhibited greater voltage variation than focal source-based VF in both the primary analysis (n = 8, 110 ± 24% vs. 55 ± 32%, P = 0.02) and the secondary analysis (n = 18, 103 ± 30% vs. 67 ± 34%, P = 0.009). Computational VF simulations also revealed greater voltage variation in rotors compared to focal sources (110 ± 19% vs. 33 ± 16%, P = 0.001), and demonstrated that this variation was due to wavebreak, secondary rotor initiation, and rotor meander. CONCLUSION: Clinical and computational studies reveal that quantitative criteria of ECG voltage variation differ significantly between VF-sustaining rotors and focal sources, and provide insight into the mechanisms of such variation. Future studies should prospectively evaluate if these criteria can separate clinical VF mechanisms and guide therapy.
INTRODUCTION:Ventricular fibrillation is a common life-threatening arrhythmia. The ECG of VF appears chaotic but may allow identification of sustaining mechanisms to guide therapy. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that rotors and focal sources manifest distinct features on the ECG, and computational modeling may identify mechanisms of such features. METHODS:VF induction was attempted in 31 patients referred for ventricular arrhythmia ablation. Simultaneous surface ECG and intracardiac electrograms were recorded using biventricular basket catheters. Endocardial phase maps were used to mechanistically classify each VF cycle as rotor or focally driven. ECGs were analyzed from patients demonstrating both mechanisms in the primary analysis and from all patients with induced VF in the secondary analysis. The ECG voltage variation during each mechanism was compared. Biventricular computer simulations of VF driven by focal sources or rotors were created and resulting ECGs of each VF mechanism were compared. RESULTS:Rotor-based VF exhibited greater voltage variation than focal source-based VF in both the primary analysis (n = 8, 110 ± 24% vs. 55 ± 32%, P = 0.02) and the secondary analysis (n = 18, 103 ± 30% vs. 67 ± 34%, P = 0.009). Computational VF simulations also revealed greater voltage variation in rotors compared to focal sources (110 ± 19% vs. 33 ± 16%, P = 0.001), and demonstrated that this variation was due to wavebreak, secondary rotor initiation, and rotor meander. CONCLUSION: Clinical and computational studies reveal that quantitative criteria of ECG voltage variation differ significantly between VF-sustaining rotors and focal sources, and provide insight into the mechanisms of such variation. Future studies should prospectively evaluate if these criteria can separate clinical VF mechanisms and guide therapy.
Authors: Melissa H Kong; Gregg C Fonarow; Eric D Peterson; Anne B Curtis; Adrian F Hernandez; Gillian D Sanders; Kevin L Thomas; David L Hayes; Sana M Al-Khatib Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-02-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Matthew J Gonzales; Gregory Sturgeon; Adarsh Krishnamurthy; Johan Hake; René Jonas; Paul Stark; Wouter-Jan Rappel; Sanjiv M Narayan; Yongjie Zhang; W Paul Segars; Andrew D McCulloch Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Sébastien Knecht; Frédéric Sacher; Matthew Wright; Mélèze Hocini; Akihiko Nogami; Thomas Arentz; Bertrand Petit; Robert Franck; Christian De Chillou; Dominique Lamaison; Jéronimo Farré; Thomas Lavergne; Thierry Verbeet; Isabelle Nault; Seiichiro Matsuo; Lionel Leroux; Rukshen Weerasooriya; Bruno Cauchemez; Nicolas Lellouche; Nicolas Derval; Sanjiv M Narayan; Pierre Jaïs; Jacques Clementy; Michel Haïssaguerre Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-08-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Hubert Cochet; Rémi Dubois; Frédéric Sacher; Nicolas Derval; Maxime Sermesant; Mélèze Hocini; Michel Montaudon; Michel Haïssaguerre; François Laurent; Pierre Jaïs Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-12-03 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Michel Haïssaguerre; Morio Shoda; Pierre Jaïs; Akihiko Nogami; Dipen C Shah; Josef Kautzner; Thomas Arentz; Dietrich Kalushe; Dominique Lamaison; Mike Griffith; Fernando Cruz; Angelo de Paola; Fiorenzo Gaïta; Mélèze Hocini; Stéphane Garrigue; Laurent Macle; Rukshen Weerasooriya; Jacques Clémenty Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-08-20 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: David E Krummen; Gordon Ho; Kurt S Hoffmayer; Franz N Schweis; Tina Baykaner; A J Rogers; Frederick T Han; Jonathan C Hsu; Mohan N Viswanathan; Paul J Wang; Wouter-Jan Rappel; Sanjiv M Narayan Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2021-02-07
Authors: Balvinder S Handa; Xinyang Li; Kedar K Aras; Norman A Qureshi; Ian Mann; Rasheda A Chowdhury; Zachary I Whinnett; Nick W F Linton; Phang Boon Lim; Prapa Kanagaratnam; Igor R Efimov; Nicholas S Peters; Fu Siong Ng Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2020-02-16