Brennan J Vogl1, Ahmed El Shaer2, Martin Van Zyl2, Ammar M Killu2, Mohamad Alkhouli2, Hoda Hatoum3,4. 1. Biomedical Engineering Department, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Biomedical Engineering Department, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA. hhatoum@mtu.edu. 4. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Health Research Institute, Center of Biocomputing and Digital Health and Institute of Computing and Cybernetics, Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Dr, Houghton, MI, 49931, USA. hhatoum@mtu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate the impact of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) on left atrial (LA) flow dynamics and geometrical changes. METHODS: This exploratory study included computational flow simulations from 10 patients who underwent catheter ablation for AF. Complete cardiac cycle dataset was simulated before and after ablation using computational fluid dynamics. The study main endpoints were the changes in LA volume, LA velocity, LA wall shear stress (WSS), circulation (Γ), vorticity, pulmonary vein (PV) ostia area, and LA vortices before and after ablation. RESULTS: There was an average decrease in LA volume (11.58 ± 15.17%) and PV ostia area (16.6 ± 21.41%) after ablation. A non-uniform trend of velocity and WSS changes were observed after ablation. Compared with pre-ablation, 4 patients exhibited lower velocities, WSS distributions, and a decreased Γ (> 8.5%), while 6 developed higher velocities and WSS distributions. These geometrical changes dictated different flow mixing in the LA and distinct vortex patterns, characterized by different spinning velocities, vorticities, and rotational directions. Regions with q-criterion > 0 were found to be dominant in the LA, indicating prevalent rotational vortex structures. CONCLUSION: Catheter ablation for AF induced different geometrical changes on the LA and the PVs, therefore influencing flow mixing and vortex patterns in the LA, in addition to overall velocity and WSS distribution. Further exploration of the impact of catheter ablation on intracardiac flow dynamics is warranted to discern patterns that may correlate with clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate the impact of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) on left atrial (LA) flow dynamics and geometrical changes. METHODS: This exploratory study included computational flow simulations from 10 patients who underwent catheter ablation for AF. Complete cardiac cycle dataset was simulated before and after ablation using computational fluid dynamics. The study main endpoints were the changes in LA volume, LA velocity, LA wall shear stress (WSS), circulation (Γ), vorticity, pulmonary vein (PV) ostia area, and LA vortices before and after ablation. RESULTS: There was an average decrease in LA volume (11.58 ± 15.17%) and PV ostia area (16.6 ± 21.41%) after ablation. A non-uniform trend of velocity and WSS changes were observed after ablation. Compared with pre-ablation, 4 patients exhibited lower velocities, WSS distributions, and a decreased Γ (> 8.5%), while 6 developed higher velocities and WSS distributions. These geometrical changes dictated different flow mixing in the LA and distinct vortex patterns, characterized by different spinning velocities, vorticities, and rotational directions. Regions with q-criterion > 0 were found to be dominant in the LA, indicating prevalent rotational vortex structures. CONCLUSION: Catheter ablation for AF induced different geometrical changes on the LA and the PVs, therefore influencing flow mixing and vortex patterns in the LA, in addition to overall velocity and WSS distribution. Further exploration of the impact of catheter ablation on intracardiac flow dynamics is warranted to discern patterns that may correlate with clinical outcomes.
Authors: Oussama M Wazni; Nassir F Marrouche; David O Martin; Atul Verma; Mandeep Bhargava; Walid Saliba; Dianna Bash; Robert Schweikert; Johannes Brachmann; Jens Gunther; Klaus Gutleben; Ennio Pisano; Dominico Potenza; Raffaele Fanelli; Antonio Raviele; Sakis Themistoclakis; Antonio Rossillo; Aldo Bonso; Andrea Natale Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-06-01 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: M Vanderheyden; M Goethals; I Anguera; P Nellens; E Andries; J Brugada; P Brugada Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 1997-10 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: Jason G Andrade; Oussama M Wazni; Malte Kuniss; Nathaniel M Hawkins; Marc W Deyell; Gian-Battista Chierchia; Steven Nissen; Atul Verma; George A Wells; Ricky D Turgeon Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2021-08-31 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jens Cosedis Nielsen; Arne Johannessen; Pekka Raatikainen; Gerhard Hindricks; Håkan Walfridsson; Ole Kongstad; Steen Pehrson; Anders Englund; Juha Hartikainen; Leif Spange Mortensen; Peter Steen Hansen Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-10-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Paulus Kirchhof; A John Camm; Andreas Goette; Axel Brandes; Lars Eckardt; Arif Elvan; Thomas Fetsch; Isabelle C van Gelder; Doreen Haase; Laurent M Haegeli; Frank Hamann; Hein Heidbüchel; Gerhard Hindricks; Josef Kautzner; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Lluis Mont; G Andre Ng; Jerzy Rekosz; Norbert Schoen; Ulrich Schotten; Anna Suling; Jens Taggeselle; Sakis Themistoclakis; Eik Vettorazzi; Panos Vardas; Karl Wegscheider; Stephan Willems; Harry J G M Crijns; Günter Breithardt Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-08-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Carlos A Morillo; Atul Verma; Stuart J Connolly; Karl H Kuck; Girish M Nair; Jean Champagne; Laurence D Sterns; Heather Beresh; Jeffrey S Healey; Andrea Natale Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Nassir F Marrouche; Johannes Brachmann; Dietrich Andresen; Jürgen Siebels; Lucas Boersma; Luc Jordaens; Béla Merkely; Evgeny Pokushalov; Prashanthan Sanders; Jochen Proff; Heribert Schunkert; Hildegard Christ; Jürgen Vogt; Dietmar Bänsch Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Douglas L Packer; Jonathan P Piccini; Kristi H Monahan; Hussein R Al-Khalidi; Adam P Silverstein; Peter A Noseworthy; Jeanne E Poole; Tristram D Bahnson; Kerry L Lee; Daniel B Mark Journal: Circulation Date: 2021-02-08 Impact factor: 29.690