Electrode-interface resistance (IR) was much less affected by remote high-impedance structures than ECI (3% vs. 32%) and strongly correlated with true electrode-tissue contact force (r2 = 0.84).
Does the novel electrode-interface resistance (IR) method accurately measure electrode-tissue contact compared to ECI and true contact force in vitro and in vivo?
A novel electrode-interface resistance method accurately measures electrode-tissue contact with multi-electrode catheters while being highly insensitive to remote structures.
Absolute Event Rate: 3% vs 32%
Aims: With multi-electrode catheters, measuring contact force (CF) on each electrode is technically challenging. Present electrical methods, like the electrical coupling index (ECI) may yield false positive values in pulmonary veins. We developed a novel method that measures electrode-interface resistance (IR) by applying a very local electrical field between neighbouring catheter electrodes while measuring voltage between each catheter electrode and a skin patch. The aim of this study was to evaluate the new IR method to measure electrode-tissue contact. Methods and results: In vitro, effects of remote high-impedance structures were studied. In addition, both ECI and IR were directly compared with true electrode-tissue CF. In five pigs, the influence of high-impedance pulmonary tissue on ECI and IR was investigated while navigating the free floating catheter into the caval veins. Inside the left atrium (LA), IR was directly compared with CF. Finally, multi-electrode IR measurements in the LA and inferior pulmonary vein (IPV) were compared. In vitro, IR is much less affected by remote high-impedance structures than ECI (3% vs. 32%). Both IR and ECI strongly relate to electrode-tissue CF (r2 = 0.84). In vivo, and in contrast to ECI, IR was not affected by nearby pulmonary tissue. Inside the LA, a strong relation between IR and CF was found. This finding was confirmed by simultaneous multi-electrode measurements in LA and IPV. Conclusion: Data of the present study suggest that electrode-tissue contact affects the IR while being highly insensitive to remote structures. This method facilitates electrode-tissue contact measurements with circular multi-electrode ablation catheters.
Es et al. (Mon,) reported a other. Electrode-interface resistance (IR) measurement vs. Electrical coupling index (ECI) was evaluated on Effect of remote high-impedance structures. Electrode-interface resistance (IR) was much less affected by remote high-impedance structures than ECI (3% vs. 32%) and strongly correlated with true electrode-tissue contact force (r2 = 0.84).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: