Pre-procedural imaging with cardiac computed tomography for endo-epicardial ventricular tachycardia ablation.

cardiac computer tomography cardiac magnetic resonance catheter ablation electroanatomical mapping ventricular tachycardia

Journal

Heart rhythm
ISSN: 1556-3871
Titre abrégé: Heart Rhythm
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101200317

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
20 Jun 2024
Historique:
received: 24 10 2023
revised: 24 05 2024
accepted: 05 06 2024
medline: 23 6 2024
pubmed: 23 6 2024
entrez: 22 6 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Studies evaluating the systematic use of cardiac computer tomography (CCT) for the pre-procedural assessment of myocardial fibrosis are limited and their implementation in the electrophysiology workflow has not been extensively described. To explore the degree of concordance between cardiac fibrosis evaluated by CCT compared to electroanatomical mapping (EAM) in patients undergoing endo-epicardial ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation. From November-2017 to December-2021, patients undergoing endo-epicardial VT catheter ablation (CA) with CCT as the only source of pre-procedural scar assessment were prospectively enrolled. After image integration, myocardial fibrosis detected with CCT was compared with low voltage areas identified by endo-epicardial EAM. Post-procedural VT recurrences of this approach were evaluated after at least one-year follow-up. 35 patients (mean age 60.7±13.2 years, 94.2% males) were enrolled. The most common underlying arrhythmic substrate was dilated cardiomyopathy (48.6%). CCT was employed for contraindications to cardiac magnetic resonance, as unstable VTs (31.4%) or non-conditional ICDs (28.8%), but also for patients' and operators' preferences (14.3%-25.7%). Myocardial fibrosis was correctly identified by CCT and EAM, with strong agreement between these two techniques, both overall (Cohen's Kappa for agreement=0.933) and in per-segment analysis (K ranging from 0.796 to 1.0). Ischemic patients showed the best correlation (K=1.000) while myocarditis showed the worst (K=0.750). After a median follow-up of 14 [12-24] months, 1-year freedom from recurrences was achieved in 74.3% patients; overall freedom from recurrences was 60.0%. A CCT-based pre-procedural assessment pre-VT ablation is feasible, showing high diagnostic concordance with EAM in detecting myocardial fibrosis.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Studies evaluating the systematic use of cardiac computer tomography (CCT) for the pre-procedural assessment of myocardial fibrosis are limited and their implementation in the electrophysiology workflow has not been extensively described.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
To explore the degree of concordance between cardiac fibrosis evaluated by CCT compared to electroanatomical mapping (EAM) in patients undergoing endo-epicardial ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation.
METHODS METHODS
From November-2017 to December-2021, patients undergoing endo-epicardial VT catheter ablation (CA) with CCT as the only source of pre-procedural scar assessment were prospectively enrolled. After image integration, myocardial fibrosis detected with CCT was compared with low voltage areas identified by endo-epicardial EAM. Post-procedural VT recurrences of this approach were evaluated after at least one-year follow-up.
RESULTS RESULTS
35 patients (mean age 60.7±13.2 years, 94.2% males) were enrolled. The most common underlying arrhythmic substrate was dilated cardiomyopathy (48.6%). CCT was employed for contraindications to cardiac magnetic resonance, as unstable VTs (31.4%) or non-conditional ICDs (28.8%), but also for patients' and operators' preferences (14.3%-25.7%). Myocardial fibrosis was correctly identified by CCT and EAM, with strong agreement between these two techniques, both overall (Cohen's Kappa for agreement=0.933) and in per-segment analysis (K ranging from 0.796 to 1.0). Ischemic patients showed the best correlation (K=1.000) while myocarditis showed the worst (K=0.750). After a median follow-up of 14 [12-24] months, 1-year freedom from recurrences was achieved in 74.3% patients; overall freedom from recurrences was 60.0%.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
A CCT-based pre-procedural assessment pre-VT ablation is feasible, showing high diagnostic concordance with EAM in detecting myocardial fibrosis.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38908459
pii: S1547-5271(24)02738-3
doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.06.025
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Auteurs

Corrado Carbucicchio (C)

Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy. Electronic address: corrado.carbucicchio@cardiologicomonzino.it.

Fabrizio Guarracini (F)

Department of Cardiology, Santa Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy.

Marco Schiavone (M)

Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Alessio Gasperetti (A)

Department of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.

Edoardo Conte (E)

Clinical Cardiology, Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio Hospital, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Alberto Preda (A)

Electrophysiology Unit, Cardio-Thoraco-Vascular Department, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.

Selene Cellucci (S)

Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Pasquale De Iuliis (P)

Biosense Webster, Johnson & Johnson Medical S.p.A., Pomezia, Italy.

Valentina Catto (V)

Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Saima Mushtaq (S)

Department of Perioperative Cardiology and Cardiovascular Imaging, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Maria Elisabetta Mancini (ME)

Department of Perioperative Cardiology and Cardiovascular Imaging, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Francesca Marchetti (F)

Department of Perioperative Cardiology and Cardiovascular Imaging, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Lorenzo Bianchini (L)

Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Fabrizio Tundo (F)

Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Massimo Moltrasio (M)

Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Daniele Andreini (D)

Clinical Cardiology, Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio Hospital, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Gianluca Pontone (G)

Department of Perioperative Cardiology and Cardiovascular Imaging, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Claudio Tondo (C)

Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Classifications MeSH