BACKGROUND: First experiences using a 64-electrode mini-basket catheter (BC) paired with an automatic mapping system (Rhythmia™) for catheter ablation (CA) of ventricular ectopy (VE) and ventricular tachycardia (VT) have been reported. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate (1) differences in ventricular access for the BC and (2) benefit of this technology in the setting of standard clinical practice. METHODS: Patients (pts) undergoing CA for VE or VT using the Intellamap Orion™ paired with the Rhythmia™ automated-mapping system were included in this study. For LV access, transseptal and retrograde access were compared. RESULTS: All 32 pts (29 men, age 63 ± 15 years) underwent CA for VE (17 pts) or VT (15 pts). For mapping of VE originating from the left ventricle (LV) in 10 out of 13 pts, a transaortic access was feasible. The predominant access for CA of VT was transaortic (5/7). Feasibility and safety seem to be equal. The total procedure time was 179.1 ± 21.2 min for VE ablation and 212.0 ± 71.7 min for VT ablation (p = 0.177). For VE, an acquisition of 1602 ± 1672 map points and annotation of 140 ± 98 automated mapping points sufficed to abolish VE in all pts. During a 6-month follow-up (FU) after CA for VE, a VE burden reduction from 18.5 ± 2.1% to 2.8 ± 2.2% (p = 0.019) was achieved. In VT pts, one patient showed recurrence of sustained VT episodes during FU. CONCLUSION: Use of a high-resolution mapping system for VE/VT CA potentially facilitates revelation of VE origin and VT circuits in the setting of standard clinical practice. Feasibility and safety of a venous, transaortic, transseptal, or a combined approach seem to be equal.
BACKGROUND: First experiences using a 64-electrode mini-basket catheter (BC) paired with an automatic mapping system (Rhythmia™) for catheter ablation (CA) of ventricular ectopy (VE) and ventricular tachycardia (VT) have been reported. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate (1) differences in ventricular access for the BC and (2) benefit of this technology in the setting of standard clinical practice. METHODS:Patients (pts) undergoing CA for VE or VT using the Intellamap Orion™ paired with the Rhythmia™ automated-mapping system were included in this study. For LV access, transseptal and retrograde access were compared. RESULTS: All 32 pts (29 men, age 63 ± 15 years) underwent CA for VE (17 pts) or VT (15 pts). For mapping of VE originating from the left ventricle (LV) in 10 out of 13 pts, a transaortic access was feasible. The predominant access for CA of VT was transaortic (5/7). Feasibility and safety seem to be equal. The total procedure time was 179.1 ± 21.2 min for VE ablation and 212.0 ± 71.7 min for VT ablation (p = 0.177). For VE, an acquisition of 1602 ± 1672 map points and annotation of 140 ± 98 automated mapping points sufficed to abolish VE in all pts. During a 6-month follow-up (FU) after CA for VE, a VE burden reduction from 18.5 ± 2.1% to 2.8 ± 2.2% (p = 0.019) was achieved. In VTpts, one patient showed recurrence of sustained VT episodes during FU. CONCLUSION: Use of a high-resolution mapping system for VE/VT CA potentially facilitates revelation of VE origin and VT circuits in the setting of standard clinical practice. Feasibility and safety of a venous, transaortic, transseptal, or a combined approach seem to be equal.
Authors: Douglas P Zipes; A John Camm; Martin Borggrefe; Alfred E Buxton; Bernard Chaitman; Martin Fromer; Gabriel Gregoratos; George Klein; Arthur J Moss; Robert J Myerburg; Silvia G Priori; Miguel A Quinones; Dan M Roden; Michael J Silka; Cynthia Tracy; Sidney C Smith; Alice K Jacobs; Cynthia D Adams; Elliott M Antman; Jeffrey L Anderson; Sharon A Hunt; Jonathan L Halperin; Rick Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel; Silvia G Priori; Jean-Jacques Blanc; Andrzej Budaj; A John Camm; Veronica Dean; Jaap W Deckers; Catherine Despres; Kenneth Dickstein; John Lekakis; Keith McGregor; Marco Metra; Joao Morais; Ady Osterspey; Juan Luis Tamargo; José Luis Zamorano Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-09-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Vivek Y Reddy; Matthew R Reynolds; Petr Neuzil; Allison W Richardson; Milos Taborsky; Krit Jongnarangsin; Stepan Kralovec; Lucie Sediva; Jeremy N Ruskin; Mark E Josephson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-12-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Silvia G Priori; Carina Blomström-Lundqvist; Andrea Mazzanti; Nico Blom; Martin Borggrefe; John Camm; Perry Mark Elliott; Donna Fitzsimons; Robert Hatala; Gerhard Hindricks; Paulus Kirchhof; Keld Kjeldsen; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Antonio Hernandez-Madrid; Nikolaos Nikolaou; Tone M Norekvål; Christian Spaulding; Dirk J Van Veldhuisen Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2015-08-29 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Roderick Tung; Nilesh S Mathuria; Rich Nagel; Ravi Mandapati; Eric F Buch; Jason S Bradfield; Marmar Vaseghi; Noel G Boyle; Kalyanam Shivkumar Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2013-10-25
Authors: Frédéric Sacher; Usha B Tedrow; Michael E Field; Jean-Marc Raymond; Bruce A Koplan; Laurence M Epstein; William G Stevenson Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2008-06-06
Authors: Roland Richard Tilz; Hisaki Makimoto; Tina Lin; Andreas Rillig; Andreas Metzner; Shibu Mathew; Sebastian Deiss; Erik Wissner; Peter Rausch; Masashi Kamioka; Christian Heeger; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Feifan Ouyang Journal: Europace Date: 2014-02-02 Impact factor: 5.214