Kennosuke Yamashita1,2, Eugene Kholmovski3,4, Elyar Ghafoori1,2,5, Roya Kamali1,2,5, Eugene Kwan1,2,5, Justin Lichter1,2, Robert MacLeod2,5, Derek J Dosdall1,2,5,6, Ravi Ranjan1,2,5. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 2. Nora Eccles Harrison Cardiovascular Research and Training Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 3. Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, UCAIR, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 4. CARMA Center, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 5. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 6. Department of Surgery, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Radiofrequency (RF) and cryoablation are routinely used to treat arrhythmias, but the extent and time course of edema associated with the two different modalities is unknown. Our goal was to follow the lesion maturation and edema formation after RF and cryoablation using serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Ventricular ablation was performed in a canine model (n = 11) using a cryo or an irrigated RF catheter. T2-weighted (T2w) edema imaging and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE)-MRI were done immediately (0 day: acute), 1 to 2 weeks (subacute), and 8 to 12 weeks (chronic) after ablation. After the final MRI, excised hearts underwent pathological evaluation. As a result, 45 ventricular lesions (cryo group: 20; RF group: 25) were evaluated. Acute LGE volume was not significantly different but acute edema volume in cryo group was significantly smaller (1225.0 ± 263.5 vs 1855.2 ± 520.5 mm3 ; P = 0.01). One week after ablation, edema still existed in both group but was similar in size. Two weeks after ablation there was no edema in either of the groups. In the chronic phase, the lesion volume for cryo and RF in LGE-MRI (296.7 ± 156.4 vs 281.6 ± 140.8 mm3 ; P = 0.73); and pathology (243.3 ± 125.9 vs 214.5 ± 148.6 mm3 ; P = 0.49), as well as depth, was comparable. CONCLUSIONS: When comparing cryo and RF lesions of similar chronic size, acute edema is larger for RF lesions. Edema resolves in both cryo and RF lesions in 1 to 2 weeks.
INTRODUCTION: Radiofrequency (RF) and cryoablation are routinely used to treat arrhythmias, but the extent and time course of edema associated with the two different modalities is unknown. Our goal was to follow the lesion maturation and edema formation after RF and cryoablation using serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Ventricular ablation was performed in a canine model (n = 11) using a cryo or an irrigated RF catheter. T2-weighted (T2w) edema imaging and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE)-MRI were done immediately (0 day: acute), 1 to 2 weeks (subacute), and 8 to 12 weeks (chronic) after ablation. After the final MRI, excised hearts underwent pathological evaluation. As a result, 45 ventricular lesions (cryo group: 20; RF group: 25) were evaluated. Acute LGE volume was not significantly different but acute edema volume in cryo group was significantly smaller (1225.0 ± 263.5 vs 1855.2 ± 520.5 mm3 ; P = 0.01). One week after ablation, edema still existed in both group but was similar in size. Two weeks after ablation there was no edema in either of the groups. In the chronic phase, the lesion volume for cryo and RF in LGE-MRI (296.7 ± 156.4 vs 281.6 ± 140.8 mm3 ; P = 0.73); and pathology (243.3 ± 125.9 vs 214.5 ± 148.6 mm3 ; P = 0.49), as well as depth, was comparable. CONCLUSIONS: When comparing cryo and RF lesions of similar chronic size, acute edema is larger for RF lesions. Edema resolves in both cryo and RF lesions in 1 to 2 weeks.
Authors: Ravi Ranjan; Ritsushi Kato; Menekhem M Zviman; Timm M Dickfeld; Ariel Roguin; Ronald D Berger; Gordon F Tomaselli; Henry R Halperin Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2011-04-14
Authors: Irfan M Khurram; John N Catanzaro; Stefan Zimmerman; Vadim Zipunnikov; Ronald D Berger; Alan Cheng; Sunil Sinha; Jane Dewire; Joseph Marine; David Spragg; Hiroshi Ashikaga; Henry Halperin; Hugh Calkins; Saman Nazarian Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2015-08-17 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: Roderick Tung; Marmar Vaseghi; David S Frankel; Pasquale Vergara; Luigi Di Biase; Koichi Nagashima; Ricky Yu; Sitaram Vangala; Chi-Hong Tseng; Eue-Keun Choi; Shaan Khurshid; Mehul Patel; Nilesh Mathuria; Shiro Nakahara; Wendy S Tzou; William H Sauer; Kairav Vakil; Usha Tedrow; J David Burkhardt; Venkatakrishna N Tholakanahalli; Anastasios Saliaris; Timm Dickfeld; J Peter Weiss; T Jared Bunch; Madhu Reddy; Arun Kanmanthareddy; David J Callans; Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy; Andrea Natale; Francis Marchlinski; William G Stevenson; Paolo Della Bella; Kalyanam Shivkumar Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2015-05-30 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Eugene G Kholmovski; Nicolas Coulombe; Joshua Silvernagel; Nathan Angel; Dennis Parker; Rob Macleod; Nassir Marrouche; Ravi Ranjan Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2016-03-21
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: Douglas L Packer; Robert C Kowal; Kevin R Wheelan; James M Irwin; Jean Champagne; Peter G Guerra; Marc Dubuc; Vivek Reddy; Linda Nelson; Richard G Holcomb; John W Lehmann; Jeremy N Ruskin Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 24.094