Key result
Noncontact mapping using a 128-electrode cavitary probe accurately reconstructed endocardial electrograms compared to direct measurement (r=0.88) and localized the origin of premature beats.
Why the study?
Does a noncontact multielectrode cavitary probe accurately reconstruct endocardial surface electrograms and activation sequences compared to direct needle electrode measurement in the intact canine left ventricle?
Does a noncontact multielectrode cavitary probe accurately reconstruct endocardial surface electrograms and activation sequences compared to direct needle electrode measurement in the intact canine left ventricle?
Effect estimate: r=0.88
Noncontact mapping using a multielectrode cavitary probe provides realistic, beat-by-beat 3D electrophysiological images of the endocardium that accurately localize premature beats and reconstruct activation sequences in a canine model.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hypothesis-generating for noncontact mapping; leaves open human translation pending clinical validation.
Khoury et al. (1998) studied Normal and abnormal beats (sinus, paced, and spontaneous premature beats). Noncontact multielectrode cavitary probe (128-electrode) vs. Directly measured endocardial electrograms using eight needle electrodes was evaluated on Correlation between computed endocardial electrograms and directly measured electrograms (r=0.88). Noncontact mapping using a 128-electrode cavitary probe accurately reconstructed endocardial electrograms compared to direct measurement (r=0.88) and localized the origin of premature beats.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: