Cargando…
In silico Comparison of Left Atrial Ablation Techniques That Target the Anatomical, Structural, and Electrical Substrates of Atrial Fibrillation
Catheter ablation therapy for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) typically includes pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and may include additional ablation lesions that target patient-specific anatomical, electrical, or structural features. Clinical centers employ different ablation strategies, which us...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7526475/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33041850 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.572874 |
_version_ | 1783588882593349632 |
---|---|
author | Roney, Caroline H. Beach, Marianne L. Mehta, Arihant M. Sim, Iain Corrado, Cesare Bendikas, Rokas Solis-Lemus, Jose A. Razeghi, Orod Whitaker, John O’Neill, Louisa Plank, Gernot Vigmond, Edward Williams, Steven E. O’Neill, Mark D. Niederer, Steven A. |
author_facet | Roney, Caroline H. Beach, Marianne L. Mehta, Arihant M. Sim, Iain Corrado, Cesare Bendikas, Rokas Solis-Lemus, Jose A. Razeghi, Orod Whitaker, John O’Neill, Louisa Plank, Gernot Vigmond, Edward Williams, Steven E. O’Neill, Mark D. Niederer, Steven A. |
author_sort | Roney, Caroline H. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Catheter ablation therapy for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) typically includes pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and may include additional ablation lesions that target patient-specific anatomical, electrical, or structural features. Clinical centers employ different ablation strategies, which use imaging data together with electroanatomic mapping data, depending on data availability. The aim of this study was to compare ablation techniques across a virtual cohort of AF patients. We constructed 20 paroxysmal and 30 persistent AF patient-specific left atrial (LA) bilayer models incorporating fibrotic remodeling from late-gadolinium enhancement (LGE) MRI scans. AF was simulated and post-processed using phase mapping to determine electrical driver locations over 15 s. Six different ablation approaches were tested: (i) PVI alone, modeled as wide-area encirclement of the pulmonary veins; PVI together with: (ii) roof and inferior lines to model posterior wall box isolation; (iii) isolating the largest fibrotic area (identified by LGE-MRI); (iv) isolating all fibrotic areas; (v) isolating the largest driver hotspot region [identified as high simulated phase singularity (PS) density]; and (vi) isolating all driver hotspot regions. Ablation efficacy was assessed to predict optimal ablation therapies for individual patients. We subsequently trained a random forest classifier to predict ablation response using (a) imaging metrics alone, (b) imaging and electrical metrics, or (c) imaging, electrical, and ablation lesion metrics. The optimal ablation approach resulting in termination, or if not possible atrial tachycardia (AT), varied among the virtual patient cohort: (i) 20% PVI alone, (ii) 6% box ablation, (iii) 2% largest fibrosis area, (iv) 4% all fibrosis areas, (v) 2% largest driver hotspot, and (vi) 46% all driver hotspots. Around 20% of cases remained in AF for all ablation strategies. The addition of patient-specific and ablation pattern specific lesion metrics to the trained random forest classifier improved predictive capability from an accuracy of 0.73 to 0.83. The trained classifier results demonstrate that the surface areas of pre-ablation driver regions and of fibrotic tissue not isolated by the proposed ablation strategy are both important for predicting ablation outcome. Overall, our study demonstrates the need to select the optimal ablation strategy for each patient. It suggests that both patient-specific fibrosis properties and driver locations are important for planning ablation approaches, and the distribution of lesions is important for predicting an acute response. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7526475 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75264752020-10-09 In silico Comparison of Left Atrial Ablation Techniques That Target the Anatomical, Structural, and Electrical Substrates of Atrial Fibrillation Roney, Caroline H. Beach, Marianne L. Mehta, Arihant M. Sim, Iain Corrado, Cesare Bendikas, Rokas Solis-Lemus, Jose A. Razeghi, Orod Whitaker, John O’Neill, Louisa Plank, Gernot Vigmond, Edward Williams, Steven E. O’Neill, Mark D. Niederer, Steven A. Front Physiol Physiology Catheter ablation therapy for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) typically includes pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and may include additional ablation lesions that target patient-specific anatomical, electrical, or structural features. Clinical centers employ different ablation strategies, which use imaging data together with electroanatomic mapping data, depending on data availability. The aim of this study was to compare ablation techniques across a virtual cohort of AF patients. We constructed 20 paroxysmal and 30 persistent AF patient-specific left atrial (LA) bilayer models incorporating fibrotic remodeling from late-gadolinium enhancement (LGE) MRI scans. AF was simulated and post-processed using phase mapping to determine electrical driver locations over 15 s. Six different ablation approaches were tested: (i) PVI alone, modeled as wide-area encirclement of the pulmonary veins; PVI together with: (ii) roof and inferior lines to model posterior wall box isolation; (iii) isolating the largest fibrotic area (identified by LGE-MRI); (iv) isolating all fibrotic areas; (v) isolating the largest driver hotspot region [identified as high simulated phase singularity (PS) density]; and (vi) isolating all driver hotspot regions. Ablation efficacy was assessed to predict optimal ablation therapies for individual patients. We subsequently trained a random forest classifier to predict ablation response using (a) imaging metrics alone, (b) imaging and electrical metrics, or (c) imaging, electrical, and ablation lesion metrics. The optimal ablation approach resulting in termination, or if not possible atrial tachycardia (AT), varied among the virtual patient cohort: (i) 20% PVI alone, (ii) 6% box ablation, (iii) 2% largest fibrosis area, (iv) 4% all fibrosis areas, (v) 2% largest driver hotspot, and (vi) 46% all driver hotspots. Around 20% of cases remained in AF for all ablation strategies. The addition of patient-specific and ablation pattern specific lesion metrics to the trained random forest classifier improved predictive capability from an accuracy of 0.73 to 0.83. The trained classifier results demonstrate that the surface areas of pre-ablation driver regions and of fibrotic tissue not isolated by the proposed ablation strategy are both important for predicting ablation outcome. Overall, our study demonstrates the need to select the optimal ablation strategy for each patient. It suggests that both patient-specific fibrosis properties and driver locations are important for planning ablation approaches, and the distribution of lesions is important for predicting an acute response. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-09-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7526475/ /pubmed/33041850 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.572874 Text en Copyright © 2020 Roney, Beach, Mehta, Sim, Corrado, Bendikas, Solis-Lemus, Razeghi, Whitaker, O’Neill, Plank, Vigmond, Williams, O’Neill and Niederer. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Physiology Roney, Caroline H. Beach, Marianne L. Mehta, Arihant M. Sim, Iain Corrado, Cesare Bendikas, Rokas Solis-Lemus, Jose A. Razeghi, Orod Whitaker, John O’Neill, Louisa Plank, Gernot Vigmond, Edward Williams, Steven E. O’Neill, Mark D. Niederer, Steven A. In silico Comparison of Left Atrial Ablation Techniques That Target the Anatomical, Structural, and Electrical Substrates of Atrial Fibrillation |
title | In silico Comparison of Left Atrial Ablation Techniques That Target the Anatomical, Structural, and Electrical Substrates of Atrial Fibrillation |
title_full | In silico Comparison of Left Atrial Ablation Techniques That Target the Anatomical, Structural, and Electrical Substrates of Atrial Fibrillation |
title_fullStr | In silico Comparison of Left Atrial Ablation Techniques That Target the Anatomical, Structural, and Electrical Substrates of Atrial Fibrillation |
title_full_unstemmed | In silico Comparison of Left Atrial Ablation Techniques That Target the Anatomical, Structural, and Electrical Substrates of Atrial Fibrillation |
title_short | In silico Comparison of Left Atrial Ablation Techniques That Target the Anatomical, Structural, and Electrical Substrates of Atrial Fibrillation |
title_sort | in silico comparison of left atrial ablation techniques that target the anatomical, structural, and electrical substrates of atrial fibrillation |
topic | Physiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7526475/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33041850 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.572874 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT roneycarolineh insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT beachmariannel insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT mehtaarihantm insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT simiain insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT corradocesare insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT bendikasrokas insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT solislemusjosea insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT razeghiorod insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT whitakerjohn insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT oneilllouisa insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT plankgernot insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT vigmondedward insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT williamsstevene insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT oneillmarkd insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation AT niedererstevena insilicocomparisonofleftatrialablationtechniquesthattargettheanatomicalstructuralandelectricalsubstratesofatrialfibrillation |