Cargando…

Local activation time sampling density for atrial tachycardia contact mapping: how much is enough?

AIMS: Local activation time (LAT) mapping forms the cornerstone of atrial tachycardia diagnosis. Although anatomic and positional accuracy of electroanatomic mapping (EAM) systems have been validated, the effect of electrode sampling density on LAT map reconstruction is not known. Here, we study the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Williams, Steven E, Harrison, James L, Chubb, Henry, Whitaker, John, Kiedrowicz, Radek, Rinaldi, Christopher A, Cooklin, Michael, Wright, Matthew, Niederer, Steven, O'Neill, Mark D
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834039/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28379525
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/eux037
_version_ 1783303584146784256
author Williams, Steven E
Harrison, James L
Chubb, Henry
Whitaker, John
Kiedrowicz, Radek
Rinaldi, Christopher A
Cooklin, Michael
Wright, Matthew
Niederer, Steven
O'Neill, Mark D
author_facet Williams, Steven E
Harrison, James L
Chubb, Henry
Whitaker, John
Kiedrowicz, Radek
Rinaldi, Christopher A
Cooklin, Michael
Wright, Matthew
Niederer, Steven
O'Neill, Mark D
author_sort Williams, Steven E
collection PubMed
description AIMS: Local activation time (LAT) mapping forms the cornerstone of atrial tachycardia diagnosis. Although anatomic and positional accuracy of electroanatomic mapping (EAM) systems have been validated, the effect of electrode sampling density on LAT map reconstruction is not known. Here, we study the effect of chamber geometry and activation complexity on optimal LAT sampling density using a combined in silico and in vivo approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: In vivo 21 atrial tachycardia maps were studied in three groups: (1) focal activation, (2) macro-re-entry, and (3) localized re-entry. In silico activation was simulated on a 4×4cm atrial monolayer, sampled randomly at 0.25–10 points/cm(2) and used to re-interpolate LAT maps. Activation patterns were studied in the geometrically simple porcine right atrium (RA) and complex human left atrium (LA). Activation complexity was introduced into the porcine RA by incomplete inter-caval linear ablation. In all cases, optimal sampling density was defined as the highest density resulting in minimal further error reduction in the re-interpolated maps. Optimal sampling densities for LA tachycardias were 0.67 ± 0.17 points/cm(2) (focal activation), 1.05 ± 0.32 points/cm(2) (macro-re-entry) and 1.23 ± 0.26 points/cm(2) (localized re-entry), P = 0.0031. Increasing activation complexity was associated with increased optimal sampling density both in silico (focal activation 1.09 ± 0.14 points/cm(2); re-entry 1.44 ± 0.49 points/cm(2); spiral-wave 1.50 ± 0.34 points/cm(2), P < 0.0001) and in vivo (porcine RA pre-ablation 0.45 ± 0.13 vs. post-ablation 0.78 ± 0.17 points/cm(2), P = 0.0008). Increasing chamber geometry was also associated with increased optimal sampling density (0.61 ± 0.22 points/cm(2) vs. 1.0 ± 0.34 points/cm(2), P = 0.0015). CONCLUSION: Optimal sampling densities can be identified to maximize diagnostic yield of LAT maps. Greater sampling density is required to correctly reveal complex activation and represent activation across complex geometries. Overall, the optimal sampling density for LAT map interpolation defined in this study was ∼1.0–1.5 points/cm(2).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5834039
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58340392018-03-07 Local activation time sampling density for atrial tachycardia contact mapping: how much is enough? Williams, Steven E Harrison, James L Chubb, Henry Whitaker, John Kiedrowicz, Radek Rinaldi, Christopher A Cooklin, Michael Wright, Matthew Niederer, Steven O'Neill, Mark D Europace Clinical Research AIMS: Local activation time (LAT) mapping forms the cornerstone of atrial tachycardia diagnosis. Although anatomic and positional accuracy of electroanatomic mapping (EAM) systems have been validated, the effect of electrode sampling density on LAT map reconstruction is not known. Here, we study the effect of chamber geometry and activation complexity on optimal LAT sampling density using a combined in silico and in vivo approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: In vivo 21 atrial tachycardia maps were studied in three groups: (1) focal activation, (2) macro-re-entry, and (3) localized re-entry. In silico activation was simulated on a 4×4cm atrial monolayer, sampled randomly at 0.25–10 points/cm(2) and used to re-interpolate LAT maps. Activation patterns were studied in the geometrically simple porcine right atrium (RA) and complex human left atrium (LA). Activation complexity was introduced into the porcine RA by incomplete inter-caval linear ablation. In all cases, optimal sampling density was defined as the highest density resulting in minimal further error reduction in the re-interpolated maps. Optimal sampling densities for LA tachycardias were 0.67 ± 0.17 points/cm(2) (focal activation), 1.05 ± 0.32 points/cm(2) (macro-re-entry) and 1.23 ± 0.26 points/cm(2) (localized re-entry), P = 0.0031. Increasing activation complexity was associated with increased optimal sampling density both in silico (focal activation 1.09 ± 0.14 points/cm(2); re-entry 1.44 ± 0.49 points/cm(2); spiral-wave 1.50 ± 0.34 points/cm(2), P < 0.0001) and in vivo (porcine RA pre-ablation 0.45 ± 0.13 vs. post-ablation 0.78 ± 0.17 points/cm(2), P = 0.0008). Increasing chamber geometry was also associated with increased optimal sampling density (0.61 ± 0.22 points/cm(2) vs. 1.0 ± 0.34 points/cm(2), P = 0.0015). CONCLUSION: Optimal sampling densities can be identified to maximize diagnostic yield of LAT maps. Greater sampling density is required to correctly reveal complex activation and represent activation across complex geometries. Overall, the optimal sampling density for LAT map interpolation defined in this study was ∼1.0–1.5 points/cm(2). Oxford University Press 2018-02 2017-04-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5834039/ /pubmed/28379525 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/eux037 Text en Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Research
Williams, Steven E
Harrison, James L
Chubb, Henry
Whitaker, John
Kiedrowicz, Radek
Rinaldi, Christopher A
Cooklin, Michael
Wright, Matthew
Niederer, Steven
O'Neill, Mark D
Local activation time sampling density for atrial tachycardia contact mapping: how much is enough?
title Local activation time sampling density for atrial tachycardia contact mapping: how much is enough?
title_full Local activation time sampling density for atrial tachycardia contact mapping: how much is enough?
title_fullStr Local activation time sampling density for atrial tachycardia contact mapping: how much is enough?
title_full_unstemmed Local activation time sampling density for atrial tachycardia contact mapping: how much is enough?
title_short Local activation time sampling density for atrial tachycardia contact mapping: how much is enough?
title_sort local activation time sampling density for atrial tachycardia contact mapping: how much is enough?
topic Clinical Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834039/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28379525
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/eux037
work_keys_str_mv AT williamsstevene localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough
AT harrisonjamesl localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough
AT chubbhenry localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough
AT whitakerjohn localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough
AT kiedrowiczradek localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough
AT rinaldichristophera localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough
AT cooklinmichael localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough
AT wrightmatthew localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough
AT niederersteven localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough
AT oneillmarkd localactivationtimesamplingdensityforatrialtachycardiacontactmappinghowmuchisenough