Key result
Automated template matching yields ~14% higher objective scores at successful versus unsuccessful outflow tract ablation sites.
Why the study?
Does automated template matching accurately identify successful ablation sites during pace mapping in patients with outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias?
Observational (n=42)
No
Does automated template matching accurately identify successful ablation sites during pace mapping in patients with outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias?
Absolute Event Rate: 94.1% vs 80.2%
p-value: p=0.0001
Automated template matching provides an objective and highly sensitive method for interpreting pace mapping to identify successful ablation sites in outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias.
May aid pace-mapping interpretation in outflow tract arrhythmias; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
AIMS: One of the disadvantages of classic pace mapping (PM) is the operator's subjective interpretation. The aim of this single-centre retrospective study was to evaluate the value of automated template matching (AMT) in patients ablated due to ventricular outflow tract arrhythmias (OTAs). METHODS AND RESULTS: From an overall group of 105 patients with OTA who were scheduled for transcatheter ablation (TA), AMT was accessible in 42 patients [21 right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT), 21 left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT), 28 women, aged 51.5 ± 12.7 years]. We used AMT to compare spontaneous arrhythmia ORS (spontQRS) with paced QRS complexes during PM in sites where radiofrequency (RF) applications were successful and in sites where RF applications were unsuccessful. The concordance was presented in per cents as objective matching scores (OMS). Then, at the successful ablation sites, we examined the relationship between OMS and the visual interpretation of PM was presented as electrophysiologists matching scores (EMS). The OMS of PM at sites of successful ablation varied from 78 to 99% (mean 94.1 ± 3.8) and from 47 to 95% (mean 80.2 ± 12.6%) at sites of unsuccessful ablation. Pace mapping in unsuccessful RF sites was significantly less similar to spontQRS morphologies than in successful RF sites (P = 0.0001). There was a significant correlation between OMS and EMS (r = 0.82; P < 0.0001). The OMS that indicated optimal ablation site was 89% (sensitivity = 95%; specificity = 80%). The mean OMS for successful sites at RVOT (95.1 ± 1.8%) and LVOT (93.1 ± 4.9%) were not different (P = 0.0551). CONCLUSION: This analysis revealed that AMT is a valuable technique for the interpretation of PM and for the identification of successful ablation sites in OTA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuteszko et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Ventricular outflow tract arrhythmias (OTAs) (n=42). Automated template matching (AMT) vs. Unsuccessful ablation sites was evaluated on Objective matching scores (OMS) comparing spontaneous QRS with paced QRS complexes at successful versus unsuccessful ablation sites (p=0.0001). Automated template matching yielded significantly higher objective matching scores at successful ablation sites compared to unsuccessful sites (94.1% vs 80.2%, P=0.0001) for outflow tract arrhythmias.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: