Accuracy of standard bipolar amplitude voltage thresholds to identify late potential channels in ventricular tachycardia ablation.
Electroanatomical mapping
Scar thresholds
Ventricular tachycardia ablation
Voltage mapping
Journal
Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing
ISSN: 1572-8595
Titre abrégé: J Interv Card Electrophysiol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9708966
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2023
Jan 2023
Historique:
received:
04
12
2021
accepted:
31
01
2022
pubmed:
24
2
2022
medline:
18
2
2023
entrez:
23
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is caused by the presence of a slow conduction channel (CC) of border zone (BZ) tissue inside the scar-core tissue. Electroanatomic mapping can depict this tissue by voltage mapping. Areas of slow conduction can be detected as late potentials (LPs) and their abolition is the most accepted ablation endpoint. In the current guidelines, bipolar voltage thresholds for BZ and core scar are 1.5 and 0.5 mV respectively. The performance of these values is controversial. The aim of the study is to analyze the diagnostic yield of current amplitude thresholds in voltage map to define VT substrate in terms of CCs of LPs. Predictors of usefulness of current thresholds will be analyzed. All patients with structural heart disease who underwent VT ablation in Hospital Clinic in 2016-2017 were included. Maps with delineation of CCs based on LPs were created with contact force sensor catheter. Thresholds were adjusted for every patient based on CCs. Diagnostic yield and predictors of performance of conventional thresholds were analyzed. During study period, 57 consecutive patients were included (age: 60.4 ± 8.5; 50.2% ischemic cardiomyopathy, LVEF 39.8 ± 13.5%). Cutoff voltages that better identified the scar and BZ according to the LP channels were 0.32 (0.02-2 mV) and 1.84 (0.3-6 mV) respectively. Current voltage thresholds identified correctly core and BZ in 87.7% and 42.1% of the patients respectively. Accuracy was worse in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) especially for BZ (28.6% vs 55.2%, p = 0.042). Accuracy of standard voltage thresholds for scar and BZ is poor in terms of LPs detection. Diagnostic yield is worse in NICM patients specially for border zone.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is caused by the presence of a slow conduction channel (CC) of border zone (BZ) tissue inside the scar-core tissue. Electroanatomic mapping can depict this tissue by voltage mapping. Areas of slow conduction can be detected as late potentials (LPs) and their abolition is the most accepted ablation endpoint. In the current guidelines, bipolar voltage thresholds for BZ and core scar are 1.5 and 0.5 mV respectively. The performance of these values is controversial. The aim of the study is to analyze the diagnostic yield of current amplitude thresholds in voltage map to define VT substrate in terms of CCs of LPs. Predictors of usefulness of current thresholds will be analyzed.
METHODS
METHODS
All patients with structural heart disease who underwent VT ablation in Hospital Clinic in 2016-2017 were included. Maps with delineation of CCs based on LPs were created with contact force sensor catheter. Thresholds were adjusted for every patient based on CCs. Diagnostic yield and predictors of performance of conventional thresholds were analyzed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
During study period, 57 consecutive patients were included (age: 60.4 ± 8.5; 50.2% ischemic cardiomyopathy, LVEF 39.8 ± 13.5%). Cutoff voltages that better identified the scar and BZ according to the LP channels were 0.32 (0.02-2 mV) and 1.84 (0.3-6 mV) respectively. Current voltage thresholds identified correctly core and BZ in 87.7% and 42.1% of the patients respectively. Accuracy was worse in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) especially for BZ (28.6% vs 55.2%, p = 0.042).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Accuracy of standard voltage thresholds for scar and BZ is poor in terms of LPs detection. Diagnostic yield is worse in NICM patients specially for border zone.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35195814
doi: 10.1007/s10840-022-01148-6
pii: 10.1007/s10840-022-01148-6
pmc: PMC9931851
doi:
Substances chimiques
Lipopolysaccharides
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
15-25Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Heart Rhythm. 2020 Jan;17(1):e2-e154
pubmed: 31085023
Circulation. 2003 Aug 12;108(6):704-10
pubmed: 12885746
Circulation. 2001 Aug 7;104(6):664-9
pubmed: 11489772
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014 Jun;7(3):424-35
pubmed: 24833642
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2015 Oct;1(5):341-352
pubmed: 29759461
Heart Rhythm. 2021 Aug;18(8):1336-1343
pubmed: 33892202
Eur Heart J. 2018 Aug 14;39(31):2867-2875
pubmed: 29617764
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 May 21;61(20):2088-95
pubmed: 23524215
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017 Mar;3(3):220-231
pubmed: 29759516
Europace. 2019 Sep 1;21(9):1392-1399
pubmed: 31102521
Heart Rhythm. 2018 Dec;15(12):1853-1861
pubmed: 30026016
Heart Rhythm. 2021 Jun;18(6):896-904
pubmed: 33639298
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2015 Feb;68(2):159-60
pubmed: 25499952
Circulation. 2003 Jul 1;107(25):3236-42
pubmed: 12796129
Heart Rhythm. 2018 Aug;15(8):1198-1205
pubmed: 29572086
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Jan 1;41(1):81-92
pubmed: 12570949
Eur Heart J. 2011 Jan;32(1):104-14
pubmed: 20864488
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 May 16;47(10):2013-9
pubmed: 16697318
Circulation. 2012 May 8;125(18):2184-96
pubmed: 22492578
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2003 Jul;14(7):675-81
pubmed: 12930243
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012 Jun;23(6):621-7
pubmed: 22486970
Circulation. 2000 Mar 21;101(11):1288-96
pubmed: 10725289