A computational modeling framework for pre-clinical evaluation of cardiac mapping systems.
arrhythmia
cardiac electrophysiology
cardiac mapping
computational modeling
regulatory science
Journal
Frontiers in physiology
ISSN: 1664-042X
Titre abrégé: Front Physiol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101549006
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
19
10
2022
accepted:
31
05
2023
medline:
24
7
2023
pubmed:
24
7
2023
entrez:
24
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There are a variety of difficulties in evaluating clinical cardiac mapping systems, most notably the inability to record the transmembrane potential throughout the entire heart during patient procedures which prevents the comparison to a relevant "gold standard". Cardiac mapping systems are comprised of hardware and software elements including sophisticated mathematical algorithms, both of which continue to undergo rapid innovation. The purpose of this study is to develop a computational modeling framework to evaluate the performance of cardiac mapping systems. The framework enables rigorous evaluation of a mapping system's ability to localize and characterize (i.e., focal or reentrant) arrhythmogenic sources in the heart. The main component of our tool is a library of computer simulations of various dynamic patterns throughout the entire heart in which the type and location of the arrhythmogenic sources are known. Our framework allows for performance evaluation for various electrode configurations, heart geometries, arrhythmias, and electrogram noise levels and involves blind comparison of mapping systems against a "silver standard" comprised of computer simulations in which the precise transmembrane potential patterns throughout the heart are known. A feasibility study was performed using simulations of patterns in the human left atria and three hypothetical virtual catheter electrode arrays. Activation times (AcT) and patterns (AcP) were computed for three virtual electrode arrays: two basket arrays with good and poor contact and one high-resolution grid with uniform spacing. The average root mean squared difference of AcTs of electrograms and those of the nearest endocardial action potential was less than 1 ms and therefore appears to be a poor performance metric. In an effort to standardize performance evaluation of mapping systems a novel performance metric is introduced based on the number of AcPs identified correctly and those considered spurious as well as misclassifications of arrhythmia type; spatial and temporal localization accuracy of correctly identified patterns was also quantified. This approach provides a rigorous quantitative analysis of cardiac mapping system performance. Proof of concept of this computational evaluation framework suggests that it could help safeguard that mapping systems perform as expected as well as provide estimates of system accuracy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37485068
doi: 10.3389/fphys.2023.1074527
pii: 1074527
pmc: PMC10358980
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1074527Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Galappaththige, Pathmanathan and Gray.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Clin Res Cardiol. 2018 Nov;107(11):1021-1032
pubmed: 29744616
Nature. 1998 Mar 5;392(6671):75-8
pubmed: 9510249
J Atr Fibrillation. 2015 Dec 31;8(4):1227
pubmed: 27957220
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017 Dec;28(12):1423-1432
pubmed: 28862787
Physiol Meas. 2009 Dec;30(12):1303-25
pubmed: 19843981
Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:720575
pubmed: 26587544
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018 Jun;11(6):e005897
pubmed: 29858382
Cardiovasc Res. 2021 Jun 16;117(7):1682-1699
pubmed: 33890620
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018 Aug;11(8):e006536
pubmed: 30354312
Europace. 2006 Aug;8(8):583-7
pubmed: 16831837
Int J Cardiol. 2019 Jul 15;287:139-147
pubmed: 30755334
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2010 Feb;3(1):105-14
pubmed: 20160178
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2019 May;42(5):499-507
pubmed: 30882924
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017 Jun;28(6):615-622
pubmed: 28185348
Front Physiol. 2020 Jul 21;11:869
pubmed: 32792983
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2019 Jan;54(1):35-42
pubmed: 30229406
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2016 Feb;2(1):55-65
pubmed: 29766854
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 18;10(2):e0117110
pubmed: 25692857
Comput Biol Med. 2018 Nov 1;102:381-389
pubmed: 30139504
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018 Oct;11(10):e005858
pubmed: 30354409
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017 Nov;3(11):1240-1248
pubmed: 29759619
J Hosp Med. 2009 Sep;4(7):E1-5
pubmed: 19753578
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2017 May;10(5):e004899
pubmed: 28500175
PLoS Comput Biol. 2013;9(3):e1002970
pubmed: 23516352
Comput Cardiol (2010). 2021 Sep;48:
pubmed: 35754517
J Arrhythm. 2017 Oct;33(5):369-409
pubmed: 29021841
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2003 Oct;14(10 Suppl):S172-9
pubmed: 14760921
Minerva Cardioangiol. 2005 Apr;53(2):109-15
pubmed: 15986005
Heart Rhythm. 2021 Mar;18(3):485-486
pubmed: 33648658
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2007 Jun;292(6):H2589-97
pubmed: 17259437
Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:5340574
pubmed: 28070511
Ann Biomed Eng. 2017 Apr;45(4):910-923
pubmed: 27921187
Circulation. 2013 Nov 5;128(19):2104-12
pubmed: 24061087
Circ Res. 1998 Jan 9-23;82(1):63-81
pubmed: 9440706
Front Physiol. 2021 Dec 09;12:732161
pubmed: 34955872
Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev. 2020 Feb 12;8(4):273-284
pubmed: 32685158
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2017 Apr;10(4):
pubmed: 28356307
Front Physiol. 2019 May 15;10:564
pubmed: 31164829
Front Physiol. 2018 Sep 21;9:1251
pubmed: 30298012
Europace. 2021 Apr 10;23(23 Suppl 2):ii9-ii13
pubmed: 33837750
Comput Biol Med. 2019 May;108:276-287
pubmed: 31015048