| Literature DB >> 33304272 |
Rheeda L Ali1,2,3, Norman A Qureshi1,2, Silvia Liverani4, Caroline H Roney1,2,3,5, Steven Kim6, P Boon Lim1,2, Jennifer H Tweedy1,3, Chris D Cantwell1,7, Nicholas S Peters1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Conduction velocity (CV) heterogeneity and myocardial fibrosis both promote re-entry, but the relationship between fibrosis as determined by left atrial (LA) late-gadolinium enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (LGE-CMRI) and CV remains uncertain.Entities:
Keywords: Atrial fibrillation; LGE-MRI; conduction velocities; electro anatomical mapping; fibrosis; image segmentation; left atrium
Year: 2020 PMID: 33304272 PMCID: PMC7693630 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2020.570203
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
FIGURE 1Diagram of the analysis methodology. All patients undergo LGE-CMRI prior to the ablation procedure (patients G and H had 2 pre-procedural LGE-CMRI to assess reproducibility of LA fibrosis-mapping). Prior to any ablation, LA EAM during pacing is performed. Localized CV is estimated from EAM data and LGE-CMRI images are segmented to estimate fibrosis density. Data is co-registered and fused, after which statistical modeling is undertaken.
FIGURE 2(A) EnsiteTM Velocity mapping system used for collecting endocardial electrograms. The LA was paced over a range of CLs and the acquired unipolar electrograms are shown in the right panel. (B) LGE-CMRI axial slice with manual segmentation delineated in yellow (C) Illustrative patient-specific map NI. (D) Illustrative patient-specific map of IIR for same patient as (C, E, F) Distribution of electrograms on the posterior and anterior walls of the LA, respectively.
Clinical demographics of patients.
| Age (y) | 62 ± 11 |
| Male | 5 (62.5) |
| Mean LA size on TTE (mm) | 41 ± 6 |
| MeanCHADS2 score | 2.4 (0–5) |
| Mean left ventricular EF (%) | 62 ± 8 |
| Hypertension | 3 (37.5) |
| Diabetes mellitus | 1 (12.5) |
| Cerebrovascular disease | 1 (12.5) |
| Coronary artery disease | 2 (25) |
| History of heart failure | 0 (0) |
| Duration of persistent AF (months) | 19 ± 10.7 |
| Anti-arrhythmic drug therapy | 6 (75) |
| (beta-blocker, flecainide, and amiodarone) |
FIGURE 3(A) Distribution of CV measurements in the study. (B) Comparison of local CV measurement distribution with regional CV estimate (red dashed line). (C) Distribution of sampled NI for patient H second scan and the density of NI across entire atrial surface for both scans.
FIGURE 4Influence of measurement area on the overall β1 estimate for association of CV with NI. Solid area denotes 95% confidence intervals. Larger measurement areas lead to lower magnitude β1 estimate. The dotted red line indicates final β1 estimate from present model for localized measurements with areas <80 mm2. The dotted blue line indicates beta estimate from Fukumoto et al1.
FIGURE 5Per-patient model intercepts (left) and slopes (right) for NI (A) and IIR (B). Values indicate the per-patient difference from the model’s overall intercept () and slope (NI: 1.00 m/s, = −0.104; IIR: = 1.94 m/s, and = −0.942. G1, G2 and H1, H2 correspond to repeat analyses of patients G and H for assessing reproducibility.