| Literature DB >> 35887599 |
Cheng-Hung Li1,2,3, Li-Wei Lo2,4, Ankit Jain4, Yu-Cheng Hsieh1,2,3,5, Yenn-Jiang Lin2,4, Shih-Lin Chang2,4, Fa-Po Chung2,4, Yu-Feng Hu2,4, Tze-Fan Chao2,4, Jo-Nan Liao2,4, Ting-Yung Chang4, Chin-Yu Lin2,4, Isaiah Carlos Lugtu4, An Nu-Khanh Ton4, Shin-Huei Liu4, Wen-Han Cheng4, Chih-Min Liu4, Cheng-I Wu4, Shih-Ann Chen1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atypical atrial flutter (aAFL) is not uncommon, especially after a prior cardiac surgery or extensive ablation in atrial fibrillation (AF). AIMS: To revisit aAFL, we used a novel Lumipoint algorithm in the Rhythmia mapping system to evaluate tachycardia circuit by the patterns of global activation histogram (GAH, SKYLINE) in assisting aAFL ablation.Entities:
Keywords: Lumipoint algorithm; atypical atrial flutter; catheter ablation; global activation histogram; high-density mapping system
Year: 2022 PMID: 35887599 PMCID: PMC9320486 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12071102
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Pers Med ISSN: 2075-4426
Figure 1Illustration of stepwise approach in application of LUMIPOINT & Skyline for aAFL in a patient with prior cardiac surgery. In frame (A), 1 denotes first step to determine the possible main circuit in isochronal map; 2 denotes second step to scan the Skyline, identify the GAH-valley, and check the corresponding highlighted area in isochronal map; and 3 denotes third step to confirm the wave-front property and characteristics of local signals in highlighted area. In frame (B), ablation lesion set showed initial cavo-tricuspid isthmus (CTI) linear ablation failed to terminate the atrial flutter; instead, focal ablation at the highlighted area by Skyline valley successfully terminated atrial flutter to sinus rhythm (SR). In the first step, isochronal map showed two reentry circuits, one with macro-reentry counterclockwise atrial flutter and the other with localized reentry confined at mid-septum. Without entrainment, we cannot confirm the mechanism. Therefore, we started with CTI linear ablation instead of focal ablation because macro-reentry CTI dependent atrial flutter was more prevalent, and focal ablation in mid-septum took more risk in AV node injury. Since activation sequence and tachycardia cycle length did not change after CTI linear ablation, focal ablation in mid-septum terminated atrial flutter to SR. In this case, limitation of activation and isochronal map were seen and Skyline in LUMIPOINT feature adds its value and helped identify the slow conduction. (TV: Tricuspid Valve).
Patients’ Clinical Characteristics (N = 15) and Atypical Atrial Flutter Characteristics.
| Clinical Charateristics | |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 65.3 ± 10.7 |
| Male ( | 9 (60%) |
| SHD | 9 (60%) |
| CHF | 6 (40%) |
| Hypertension | 6 (40%) |
| Diabetes Mellitus | 3 (20%) |
| CAD | 5 (33%) |
| Stroke | 1 (7%) |
| CHA2DS2-VASc score | 2.6 ± 2 |
| LVEF (%) | 52.1 ± 10.8% |
| Prior Procedure | 12 (80%) |
| Post-cardiovascular Surgery | 7 (47%) |
| Post-AF/AFL Ablation | 6 (40%) |
| No. of Previous Procedure | 0.8 ± 1.0 |
| PVI | 6 (40%) |
| Roof Line | 5 (33%) |
| Mitral Isthmus Line | 5 (33%) |
| Cavo-tricuspid Isthmus Line | 8 (53%) |
| Defragmentation in LA (CFAE ablation) | 1 (7%) |
| Follow-up (m) | 12.5 ± 9.3 |
| aAFL characteristics ( | |
| Macro-reentry AFL | 14 (70%) |
| Anatomical AFL | 8 (40%) |
| Peri-mitral | 4 |
| Peri-tricuspid | 1 |
| Roof-dependent | 2 |
| Between Aortic groove & mitral | 1 |
| Surgical Scar-related | 3 (15%) |
| Other atypical AFL (gap related, inter-atrial septum) | 3 (15%) |
| Localized reentry (micro-reentry) | 5 (25%) |
| Multiple loop AFL | 1 (5%) |
aAFL: atypical atrial Fluter; AFL: atrial flutter; SHD: Structure heart disease; CHF: congestive heart failure, CAD: coronary artery disease, CHA2DS2-VASc = congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 years or older, diabetes mellitus, previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, female; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; AF: atrial fibrillation; AFL: atrial flutter, PVI: pulmonary vein isolation; CFAE: complex fractionated atrial electrograms.
Highlighted areas and lowest GAH-Valley in LUMIPOINT algorithm.
| Total No. of GAH-Valley | No. of GAH-Valley per AFL | No. of | No. of | No. of | Successful | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Macroreentry AFL ( | 27 | 2 (1-2) | 51 | 2 (1-2) | 3 (2–5) | 8/14 |
| Localized reentry AFL ( | 6 | 1 (1–1) | 11 | 1.5 (1–3) | 1 (1–3) | 4/5 |
| Multiple loop AFL ( | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0/1 |
| Total ( | 34 | 1.5 (1-2) | 63 | 2 (1-2) | 3 (1–4.5) | 12/20 |
Values are given as n, median (25th percentile-75th percentile), or n/n (%).
Electrophysiological properties of highlighted areas based on the lowest GAH-Valley.
| (A) 14 Macroreentry AFL | Slow Conduction ( | Wavefront Collision ( | Line of Block ( | Others ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| In the circuit ( | 19/23 (83) | 0 | 0 | 1/3 (33) |
| Out of the circuit ( | 4/23 (17) | 20/20 (100) | 5/5 (100) | 2/3 (67) |
| Total ( | 23 (45) | 20 (39) | 5 (10) | 3 (6) |
| (B) 5 Localized AFL | Slow Conduction ( | Wavefront Collision ( | Line of Block ( | Others ( |
| In the circuit ( | 6/6 (100) | 0/5 (0) | 0 | 0 |
| Out of the circuit ( | 0/6 (0) | 5/5 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| Total ( | 6 (55) | 5 (45) | 0 | 0 |
| (C) 1 Multiple loop AFL | Slow conduction ( | Wavefront Collision ( | Line of Block | Others |
| In the circuit ( | 1/1 (100) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Out of the circuit ( | 0/0 (0) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total ( | 1/1 (100) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| (D) Total 20 AFL | Slow conduction ( | Wavefront Collision ( | Line of Block | Others |
| In the circuit ( | 26/30 (87) | 0/26 (0) | 0/5 (0) | 1/3 (33) |
| Out of the circuit ( | 4/30 (13) | 26/26 (100) | 5/5 (100) | 2/3 (67) |
| Total ( | 30 (47) | 26 (41) | 5 (8) | 3 (5) |
Figure 2A case of localized reentry aAFL.
Figure 3A case of multiple-loop (figure-of-eight) macro-reentry aAFL. Right panel shows wave-front propagating through a slow conduction region at the lateral mitral annulus before diverging into three different activation wave-fronts; critical slow conduction along with LSPV ridge (a), wave-front collision (b), and another region of slow conduction along the LIPV ridge (c).
Figure 4(A) GAH-Valley Score at the Successful Site. (B) Distributions of GAH-Scores in different types of Reentry aAFLs. In the localized reentry, the highlighted area of GAH-Valley scores < 0.2 significantly matched with the successful ablation sites, compared with both macro- and multiple-loop reentry aAFLs (Left). Likewise if excluding the multiple-loop reentry (Right).
Figure 5The proposed stepwise approach in LumipointTM module to identify practical ablation sites in patients with aAFL.