Why the study?
The study aimed to evaluate differences in left atrial and left ventricular electro-anatomical maps when analyzed using automated omnipolar mapping technology versus standard bipolar settings and HD wave algorithm.
Does automated omnipolar mapping improve point density, voltage detection, and scar/gap identification compared to standard bipolar and HD wave mapping in patients with LA or LV arrhythmias?
Does automated omnipolar mapping improve point density, voltage detection, and scar/gap identification compared to standard bipolar and HD wave mapping in patients with LA or LV arrhythmias?
Omnipolar mapping retrospectively applied to electro-anatomical maps significantly increases point density and voltage while altering the detection of PV gaps and scar size compared to standard bipolar mapping.
Omnipolar mapping may enhance LA/LV scar and gap detection; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice pending prospective trials.
BACKGROUND: Omnipolar mapping (OT) is a novel tool to acquire omnipolar signals for electro-anatomical mapping, displaying true voltage and real-time wavefront direction and speed independent of catheter orientation. The aim was to analyze previously performed left atrial (LA) and left ventricular (LV) maps for differences using automated OT vs. standard bipolar settings (SD) and HD wave (HDW) algorithm. METHODS: Previously obtained SD and HDW maps of the LA and LV using a 16-electrode, grid-shaped catheter were retrospectively analyzed by applying automated OT, comparing voltage, point density, pulmonary vein (PV) gaps, and LV scar area. RESULTS: In this analysis, 135 maps of 45 consecutive patients (30 treated for LA, 15 for LV arrhythmia) were included. Atrial maps revealed significantly higher point densities using OT (21471) vs. SD (6682) or HDW (12189, p < 0.001). Mean voltage was significantly higher using OT (0.75 mV) vs. SD (0.61 mV) or HDW (0.64 mV, p < 0.001). OT maps detected significantly more PV gaps per patient vs. SD (4 vs. 2), p = 0.001. In LV maps, OT revealed significantly higher point densities (25951) vs. SD (8582) and HDW (17071), p < 0.001. Mean voltage was significantly higher for OT (1.49 mV) vs. SD (1.19 mV) and HDW (1.2 mV), p < 0.001. Detected scar area was significantly smaller using OT (25.3%) vs. SD (33.9%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: OT mapping leads to significantly different substrate display, map density, voltage, detection of PV gaps, and scar size, compared to SD and HDW in LA and LV procedures. Successful CA might be facilitated due to true HD maps.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dittrich et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: