Key result
Features extracted from unipolar electrograms using a noncontact mapping system significantly differentiated epicardial from endocardial pacing sites (p<0.01).
Why the study?
Can characteristics of reconstructed unipolar electrograms from a noncontact mapping system discriminate between epicardial and endocardial electrical activation in a canine heart?
Can characteristics of reconstructed unipolar electrograms from a noncontact mapping system discriminate between epicardial and endocardial electrical activation in a canine heart?
p-value: p=<0.01
Noncontact mapping can reliably discriminate between endocardial and epicardial origins of electrical activation based on unipolar electrogram morphology in a canine model.
Hypothesis-generating for noncontact unipolar mapping to distinguish epicardial vs endocardial sites; human validation required before clinical use.
The aim of this study is to determine if some of the characteristics of reconstructed unipolar electrograms from the noncontact mapping system can be used to detect epicardial electrical activation in a canine heart. This would help the electrophysiologist know where exactly the origin or the critical point in tissue is located. Following this, arrhythmia can be successfully treated by ablating that part of the tissue of heart. Virtual electrograms were recorded while pacing the right ventricle of an open-chest dog at multiple endocardial and epicardial sites using the commercially available noncontact mapping system (EnSite 3000). The endocardial and epicardial paced virtual electrograms from the juxtaposing sites allow for analyzing systematically the differences in their morphologies. Maximal dV/dt, area under the depolarization curve and latency extracted from unipolar electrograms demonstrated significant difference between epicardial and endocardial pacing sites with a p-value of less than 0.01 in all three cases. The above features were fed to a linear discriminant analysis based classifier and high classification accuracy was achieved. In conclusion, reliable criteria can be proposed to allow for discrimination of an endocardial versus epicardial origin of electrical activation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shokrollahi et al. (2009) studied Epicardial electrical activation. Noncontact mapping system (EnSite 3000) for epicardial pacing vs. Endocardial pacing was evaluated on Differences in morphologies of virtual electrograms (maximal dV/dt, area under the depolarization curve, and latency) (p=<0.01). Features extracted from unipolar electrograms using a noncontact mapping system significantly differentiated epicardial from endocardial pacing sites (p<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: