Cargando…

Direct Comparison of Adjacent Endocardial and Epicardial Electrograms: Implications for Substrate Mapping

BACKGROUND: Analysis of unipolar voltage maps has been used to detect epicardial scar, but data to define optimal parameters to identify scar remote from the recording site is limited. This study compares the characteristics of electrograms at endocardial sites adjacent to abnormal epicardial sites....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tokuda, Michifumi, Tedrow, Usha B., Inada, Keiichi, Reichlin, Tobias, Michaud, Gregory F., John, Roy M., Epstein, Laurence M., Stevenson, William G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3835221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24113324
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.113.000215
_version_ 1782292118609330176
author Tokuda, Michifumi
Tedrow, Usha B.
Inada, Keiichi
Reichlin, Tobias
Michaud, Gregory F.
John, Roy M.
Epstein, Laurence M.
Stevenson, William G.
author_facet Tokuda, Michifumi
Tedrow, Usha B.
Inada, Keiichi
Reichlin, Tobias
Michaud, Gregory F.
John, Roy M.
Epstein, Laurence M.
Stevenson, William G.
author_sort Tokuda, Michifumi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Analysis of unipolar voltage maps has been used to detect epicardial scar, but data to define optimal parameters to identify scar remote from the recording site is limited. This study compares the characteristics of electrograms at endocardial sites adjacent to abnormal epicardial sites. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data obtained from endocardial and epicardial electroanatomical maps of 31 patients with scar‐related ventricular tachycardia were reviewed. Five hundred twenty‐three pairs of endo‐ and epicardial points were selected according to predefined criteria. The endocardial points adjacent to epicardial scar (bipolar voltage <1.5 mV) had smaller unipolar voltage than those distant from epicardial scar (P<0.001). In multivariable analysis, unipolar voltage was the only endocardial electrogram predictor of epicardial scar (P<0.001, OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.97). An endocardial unipolar amplitude <4.4 mV in the right ventricular (RV) (sensitivity 93%, specificity 76%) and <5.1 mV in the left ventricular (LV) (sensitivity 91%, specificity 75%) was the optimal cutoff predicting epicardial scar. Applying these thresholds to electroanatomical maps, revealed a good match between endocardial unipolar abnormality and epicardial scar for 67% of LV and 75% of RV maps, respectively, but notably poor matches occurred in 8 (29%) maps (7 with nonischemic cardiomyopathy). Site‐by‐site correlations were better for ischemic than nonischemic cardiomyopathy. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the contention that unipolar electrograms are capable of indicating overlying epicardial scar during endocardial mapping, but illustrates limitations that appear to differ with nonischemic as compared to ischemic cardiomyopathy. The presence of epicardial arrhythmia substrate cannot be excluded by analysis of unipolar endocardial maps in some patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3835221
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38352212013-11-25 Direct Comparison of Adjacent Endocardial and Epicardial Electrograms: Implications for Substrate Mapping Tokuda, Michifumi Tedrow, Usha B. Inada, Keiichi Reichlin, Tobias Michaud, Gregory F. John, Roy M. Epstein, Laurence M. Stevenson, William G. J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: Analysis of unipolar voltage maps has been used to detect epicardial scar, but data to define optimal parameters to identify scar remote from the recording site is limited. This study compares the characteristics of electrograms at endocardial sites adjacent to abnormal epicardial sites. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data obtained from endocardial and epicardial electroanatomical maps of 31 patients with scar‐related ventricular tachycardia were reviewed. Five hundred twenty‐three pairs of endo‐ and epicardial points were selected according to predefined criteria. The endocardial points adjacent to epicardial scar (bipolar voltage <1.5 mV) had smaller unipolar voltage than those distant from epicardial scar (P<0.001). In multivariable analysis, unipolar voltage was the only endocardial electrogram predictor of epicardial scar (P<0.001, OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.97). An endocardial unipolar amplitude <4.4 mV in the right ventricular (RV) (sensitivity 93%, specificity 76%) and <5.1 mV in the left ventricular (LV) (sensitivity 91%, specificity 75%) was the optimal cutoff predicting epicardial scar. Applying these thresholds to electroanatomical maps, revealed a good match between endocardial unipolar abnormality and epicardial scar for 67% of LV and 75% of RV maps, respectively, but notably poor matches occurred in 8 (29%) maps (7 with nonischemic cardiomyopathy). Site‐by‐site correlations were better for ischemic than nonischemic cardiomyopathy. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the contention that unipolar electrograms are capable of indicating overlying epicardial scar during endocardial mapping, but illustrates limitations that appear to differ with nonischemic as compared to ischemic cardiomyopathy. The presence of epicardial arrhythmia substrate cannot be excluded by analysis of unipolar endocardial maps in some patients. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2013-10-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3835221/ /pubmed/24113324 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.113.000215 Text en © 2013 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Research
Tokuda, Michifumi
Tedrow, Usha B.
Inada, Keiichi
Reichlin, Tobias
Michaud, Gregory F.
John, Roy M.
Epstein, Laurence M.
Stevenson, William G.
Direct Comparison of Adjacent Endocardial and Epicardial Electrograms: Implications for Substrate Mapping
title Direct Comparison of Adjacent Endocardial and Epicardial Electrograms: Implications for Substrate Mapping
title_full Direct Comparison of Adjacent Endocardial and Epicardial Electrograms: Implications for Substrate Mapping
title_fullStr Direct Comparison of Adjacent Endocardial and Epicardial Electrograms: Implications for Substrate Mapping
title_full_unstemmed Direct Comparison of Adjacent Endocardial and Epicardial Electrograms: Implications for Substrate Mapping
title_short Direct Comparison of Adjacent Endocardial and Epicardial Electrograms: Implications for Substrate Mapping
title_sort direct comparison of adjacent endocardial and epicardial electrograms: implications for substrate mapping
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3835221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24113324
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.113.000215
work_keys_str_mv AT tokudamichifumi directcomparisonofadjacentendocardialandepicardialelectrogramsimplicationsforsubstratemapping
AT tedrowushab directcomparisonofadjacentendocardialandepicardialelectrogramsimplicationsforsubstratemapping
AT inadakeiichi directcomparisonofadjacentendocardialandepicardialelectrogramsimplicationsforsubstratemapping
AT reichlintobias directcomparisonofadjacentendocardialandepicardialelectrogramsimplicationsforsubstratemapping
AT michaudgregoryf directcomparisonofadjacentendocardialandepicardialelectrogramsimplicationsforsubstratemapping
AT johnroym directcomparisonofadjacentendocardialandepicardialelectrogramsimplicationsforsubstratemapping
AT epsteinlaurencem directcomparisonofadjacentendocardialandepicardialelectrogramsimplicationsforsubstratemapping
AT stevensonwilliamg directcomparisonofadjacentendocardialandepicardialelectrogramsimplicationsforsubstratemapping