Differences in atrial substrate localization using late gadolinium enhancement-magnetic resonance imaging, electrogram voltage, and conduction velocity: a cohort study using a consistent anatomical reference frame in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.
Atrial cardiomyopathy
Atrial fibrillation
Conduction velocity
Electro-anatomical mapping
LGE-MRI
Journal
Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology
ISSN: 1532-2092
Titre abrégé: Europace
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100883649
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 08 2023
02 08 2023
Historique:
received:
12
06
2023
accepted:
10
09
2023
medline:
29
9
2023
pubmed:
15
9
2023
entrez:
15
9
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Electro-anatomical voltage, conduction velocity (CV) mapping, and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have been correlated with atrial cardiomyopathy (ACM). However, the comparability between these modalities remains unclear. This study aims to (i) compare pathological substrate extent and location between current modalities, (ii) establish spatial histograms in a cohort, (iii) develop a new estimated optimized image intensity threshold (EOIIT) for LGE-MRI identifying patients with ACM, (iv) predict rhythm outcome after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). Thirty-six ablation-naive persistent AF patients underwent LGE-MRI and high-definition electro-anatomical mapping in sinus rhythm. Late gadolinium enhancement areas were classified using the UTAH, image intensity ratio (IIR >1.20), and new EOIIT method for comparison to low-voltage substrate (LVS) and slow conduction areas <0.2 m/s. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine LGE thresholds optimally matching LVS. Atrial cardiomyopathy was defined as LVS extent ≥5% of the left atrium (LA) surface at <0.5 mV. The degree and distribution of detected pathological substrate (percentage of individual LA surface are) varied significantly (P < 0.001) across the mapping modalities: 10% (interquartile range 0-14%) of the LA displayed LVS <0.5 mV vs. 7% (0-12%) slow conduction areas <0.2 m/s vs. 15% (8-23%) LGE with the UTAH method vs. 13% (2-23%) using IIR >1.20, with most discrepancies on the posterior LA. Optimized image intensity thresholds and each patient's mean blood pool intensity correlated linearly (R2 = 0.89, P < 0.001). Concordance between LGE-MRI-based and LVS-based ACM diagnosis improved with the novel EOIIT applied at the anterior LA [83% sensitivity, 79% specificity, area under the curve (AUC): 0.89] in comparison to the UTAH method (67% sensitivity, 75% specificity, AUC: 0.81) and IIR >1.20 (75% sensitivity, 62% specificity, AUC: 0.67). Discordances in detected pathological substrate exist between LVS, CV, and LGE-MRI in the LA, irrespective of the LGE detection method. The new EOIIT method improves concordance of LGE-MRI-based ACM diagnosis with LVS in ablation-naive AF patients but discrepancy remains particularly on the posterior wall. All methods may enable the prediction of rhythm outcomes after PVI in patients with persistent AF.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37713626
pii: 7275017
doi: 10.1093/europace/euad278
pmc: PMC10533207
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Gadolinium
AU0V1LM3JT
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : DO637/22-3
Organisme : Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst Baden-Württemberg
Organisme : Research Seed Capital
Organisme : Medtronic
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest: We have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: R.M.F.V., B.R.F., and A.V.C. are employees of Adas 3D Medical. This investigator-initiated study was financially supported by Medtronic. Medtronic had no influence on collection, analysis, and interpretation of data, in the writing of the report, and in the decision to submit the article for publication. All remaining authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Références
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2023 Mar 23;:
pubmed: 36952090
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018 Jan;4(1):49-58
pubmed: 29600786
Comput Biol Med. 2018 Jan 1;92:188-196
pubmed: 29223114
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2017 Nov;10(11):
pubmed: 29141843
Front Physiol. 2020 Nov 26;11:575846
pubmed: 33324239
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2022 Nov 1;22(1):457
pubmed: 36319975
Cardiovasc Digit Health J. 2021 Apr;2(2):126-136
pubmed: 33899043
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017 Jun;3(6):531-546
pubmed: 29159313
Europace. 2016 Dec;18(suppl 4):iv146-iv155
pubmed: 28011842
Med Image Anal. 2021 Dec;74:102210
pubmed: 34450467
Europace. 2019 Oct 1;21(10):1484-1493
pubmed: 31280323
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012 Feb;5(1):220-8
pubmed: 22334429
Europace. 2016 Dec;18(12):1758-1772
pubmed: 27247007
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020 Nov;13(11):e008707
pubmed: 33031713
Europace. 2021 Oct 9;23(10):1559-1567
pubmed: 33975341
Heart Rhythm. 2017 Jan;14(1):e3-e40
pubmed: 27320515
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018 Jan;4(1):99-108
pubmed: 29600792
Europace. 2023 May 19;25(5):
pubmed: 37125968
Europace. 2023 Mar 30;25(3):1162-1171
pubmed: 36637110
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2023 Feb;34(2):302-312
pubmed: 36571158
Europace. 2023 Feb 8;25(1):211-222
pubmed: 35943361
N Engl J Med. 2015 May 7;372(19):1812-22
pubmed: 25946280
Europace. 2021 Mar 8;23(3):380-388
pubmed: 33227129
Europace. 2021 Nov 8;23(11):1815-1825
pubmed: 33970234
JAMA. 2022 Jun 21;327(23):2296-2305
pubmed: 35727277
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014 Oct;7(5):825-33
pubmed: 25151631
J Clin Invest. 1993 Jul;92(1):122-40
pubmed: 8325977
Europace. 2017 Aug 01;19(8):1272-1279
pubmed: 27940935
J Clin Med. 2021 Apr 20;10(8):
pubmed: 33924210
Eur Heart J. 2021 Feb 1;42(5):373-498
pubmed: 32860505
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2017 Nov;37(6):596-601
pubmed: 26762841
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Jan 24;69(3):303-321
pubmed: 28104073
Circulation. 2009 Apr 7;119(13):1758-67
pubmed: 19307477
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2022 Apr;8(4):437-449
pubmed: 35450598
Europace. 2022 Jul 21;24(7):1102-1111
pubmed: 35298612
Echocardiography. 2016 Jun;33(6):821-9
pubmed: 26864458
JAMA. 2014 Feb 5;311(5):498-506
pubmed: 24496537
Europace. 2018 Nov 1;20(FI_3):f359-f365
pubmed: 29016757
Heart Rhythm. 2012 Dec;9(12):2003-9
pubmed: 23000671
Europace. 2018 Jun 1;20(6):956-962
pubmed: 28605524
Sci Rep. 2020 Jun 4;10(1):9147
pubmed: 32499483
Europace. 2020 Feb 1;22(2):240-249
pubmed: 31782781
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2016 Mar;9(3):
pubmed: 26966286
Clin Res Cardiol. 2022 Sep;111(9):1018-1027
pubmed: 34854991