Key result
PURE EP platform outperforms conventional systems by accurately estimating contact force and reducing ablation noise.
Why the study?
Current electrophysiology signal recording and mapping systems have limited dynamic range and bandwidth, which causes loss of valuable information during acquisition of cardiac signals.
Does the PURE EP system improve intracardiac signal recording quality compared to conventional systems in a canine model?
Does the PURE EP system improve intracardiac signal recording quality compared to conventional systems in a canine model?
The novel PURE EP signal processing platform provides improved signal quality with reduced artefact and correlates well with contact force during ablation in a canine model.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No change to ablation practice warranted; leaves open translation of PURE EP benefits to patients.
AIMS: Current electrophysiology signal recording and mapping systems have limited dynamic range (DR) and bandwidth, which causes loss of valuable information during acquisition of cardiac signals. We evaluated a novel advanced signal processing platform with the objective to obtain and assess additional information of clinical importance. METHODS AND RESULTS: Over 10 canines, we compared intracardiac recordings within all cardiac chambers, in various rhythms, in pacing and during radiofrequency (RF) ablation across two platforms; a conventional system and the PURE EP™ [(PEP); Bio Sig Technologies, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, USA]. Recording cardiac signals with varying amplitudes were consistently and reproducibly observed, without loss of detail or introduction of artefact. Further the amplitude of current of injury (COI) on the unipolar signals correlated with the instantaneous contact force (CF) recorded on the sensing catheter in all the animals (r2 = 0.94 in ventricle). The maximum change in the unipolar COI correlated with the change in local electrogram amplitude during non-irrigated RF ablation (r2 = 0.61 in atrium). Reduction in artefact attributable to pacing (20 sites) and noise during ablation (48 sites) was present on the PEP system. Within the PEP system, simultaneous display of identical signals, filtered differently, aided the visualization of discrete conduction tissue signals. CONCLUSION: Compared to current system, the PEP system provided incremental information including identifying conduction tissue signals, estimates of CF and a surrogate for lesion formation. This novel signal processing platform with increased DR and minimal front-end filtering may be useful in clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Padmanabhan et al. (2020) studied Cardiac electrophysiology mapping and ablation (n=10). PURE EP™ (PEP) system vs. Conventional system was evaluated on Correlation of current of injury amplitude with instantaneous contact force (r2 = 0.94). The PURE EP signal processing platform provided incremental information over conventional systems, including estimates of contact force (r2 = 0.94 in ventricle) and reduced pacing and ablation noise.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: