Miguel Rodrigo1, Andreu M Climent1, Alejandro Liberos1, Francisco Fernández-Avilés1, Omer Berenfeld1, Felipe Atienza1, Maria S Guillem2. 1. From the ITACA Institute, Universitat Politècnica de València, Spain (M.R., M.S.G.); CIBERCV, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Instituto de investigación sanitaria Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain (A.M.C., A.L., F.F.-A., F.A.); Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain (F.F.-A., F.A.); and Center for Arrhythmia Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (O.B.). 2. From the ITACA Institute, Universitat Politècnica de València, Spain (M.R., M.S.G.); CIBERCV, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Instituto de investigación sanitaria Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain (A.M.C., A.L., F.F.-A., F.A.); Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain (F.F.-A., F.A.); and Center for Arrhythmia Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (O.B.). mguisan@eln.upv.es.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Phase mapping has become a broadly used technique to identify atrial reentrant circuits for ablative therapy guidance. This work studies the phase mapping process and how the signal nature and its filtering affect the reentrant pattern characterization in electrogram (EGM), body surface potential mapping, and electrocardiographic imaging signals. METHODS AND RESULTS: EGM, body surface potential mapping, and electrocardiographic imaging phase maps were obtained from 17 simulations of atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, and focal atrial tachycardia. Reentrant activity was identified by singularity point recognition in raw signals and in signals after narrow band-pass filtering at the highest dominant frequency (HDF). Reentrant activity was dominantly present in the EGM recordings only for atrial fibrillation and some atrial flutter propagations patterns, and HDF filtering allowed increasing the reentrant activity detection from 60% to 70% of time in atrial fibrillation in unipolar recordings and from 0% to 62% in bipolar. In body surface potential mapping maps, HDF filtering increased from 10% to 90% the sensitivity, although provoked a residual false reentrant activity ≈30% of time. In electrocardiographic imaging, HDF filtering allowed to increase ≤100% the time with detected rotors, although provoked the apparition of false rotors during 100% of time. Nevertheless, raw electrocardiographic imaging phase maps presented reentrant activity just in atrial fibrillation recordings accounting for ≈80% of time. CONCLUSIONS: Rotor identification is accurate and sensitive and does not require additional signal processing in measured or noninvasively computed unipolar EGMs. Bipolar EGMs and body surface potential mapping do require HDF filtering to detect rotors at the expense of a decreased specificity.
BACKGROUND: Phase mapping has become a broadly used technique to identify atrial reentrant circuits for ablative therapy guidance. This work studies the phase mapping process and how the signal nature and its filtering affect the reentrant pattern characterization in electrogram (EGM), body surface potential mapping, and electrocardiographic imaging signals. METHODS AND RESULTS: EGM, body surface potential mapping, and electrocardiographic imaging phase maps were obtained from 17 simulations of atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, and focal atrial tachycardia. Reentrant activity was identified by singularity point recognition in raw signals and in signals after narrow band-pass filtering at the highest dominant frequency (HDF). Reentrant activity was dominantly present in the EGM recordings only for atrial fibrillation and some atrial flutter propagations patterns, and HDF filtering allowed increasing the reentrant activity detection from 60% to 70% of time in atrial fibrillation in unipolar recordings and from 0% to 62% in bipolar. In body surface potential mapping maps, HDF filtering increased from 10% to 90% the sensitivity, although provoked a residual false reentrant activity ≈30% of time. In electrocardiographic imaging, HDF filtering allowed to increase ≤100% the time with detected rotors, although provoked the apparition of false rotors during 100% of time. Nevertheless, raw electrocardiographic imaging phase maps presented reentrant activity just in atrial fibrillation recordings accounting for ≈80% of time. CONCLUSIONS: Rotor identification is accurate and sensitive and does not require additional signal processing in measured or noninvasively computed unipolar EGMs. Bipolar EGMs and body surface potential mapping do require HDF filtering to detect rotors at the expense of a decreased specificity.
Authors: Brian J Hansen; Jichao Zhao; Ning Li; Alexander Zolotarev; Stanislav Zakharkin; Yufeng Wang; Josh Atwal; Anuradha Kalyanasundaram; Suhaib H Abudulwahed; Katelynn M Helfrich; Anna Bratasz; Kimerly A Powell; Bryan Whitson; Peter J Mohler; Paul M L Janssen; Orlando P Simonetti; John D Hummel; Vadim V Fedorov Journal: JACC Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2018-11-01
Authors: Miguel Rodrigo; Andreu M Climent; Ismael Hernández-Romero; Alejandro Liberos; Tina Baykaner; Albert J Rogers; Mahmood Alhusseini; Paul J Wang; Francisco Fernández-Avilés; Maria S Guillem; Sanjiv M Narayan; Felipe Atienza Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2020-02-13
Authors: Matthijs Cluitmans; Dana H Brooks; Rob MacLeod; Olaf Dössel; María S Guillem; Peter M van Dam; Jana Svehlikova; Bin He; John Sapp; Linwei Wang; Laura Bear Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-09-20 Impact factor: 4.566
Authors: Balvinder S Handa; Caroline H Roney; Charles Houston; Norman A Qureshi; Xinyang Li; David S Pitcher; Rasheda A Chowdhury; Phang Boon Lim; Emmanuel Dupont; Steven A Niederer; Chris D Cantwell; Nicholas S Peters; Fu Siong Ng Journal: Comput Biol Med Date: 2018-07-17 Impact factor: 4.589
Authors: Xin Li; Tiago P Almeida; Nawshin Dastagir; María S Guillem; João Salinet; Gavin S Chu; Peter J Stafford; Fernando S Schlindwein; G André Ng Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2020-07-21 Impact factor: 4.566