Key result
Two-site DEEP mapping identifies ~1.6 pacemap-matching lines of conduction block in scar-related VT.
Why the study?
The ventricular tachycardia substrate map is influenced by rhythm during mapping, prompting investigation into the effects of different pacing sites using decrement-evoked potential mapping.
Does two-site pacing DEEP mapping improve the identification of lines of conduction block in patients with scar-related ventricular tachycardia?
Observational (n=20)
Does two-site pacing DEEP mapping improve the identification of lines of conduction block in patients with scar-related ventricular tachycardia?
Two-site (RVA and LVOT) pacing DEEP mapping identifies a high number of pacemap-matching lines of conduction block on critical substrates in patients with scar-related VT.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
VT recurrence in one-third of patients after DEEP mapping cautions against routine adoption; leaves open optimal pacing site effects on outcomes.
Background and aims The ventricular tachycardia (VT) substrate map is influenced by the rhythm during mapping. This study aimed to elucidate the effects of different pacing sites on substrate mapping using decrement-evoked potential (DEEP) mapping in patients with scar-related VT. Methods Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) or nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) who underwent substrate mapping and ablation for scar-related VT were included. DEEP mapping was performed during right ventricular apex (RVA) and epicardial left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) pacing. We analyzed the number, location, shape, and timing of lines of conduction block (LOB) using substrate maps obtained during RVA and LVOT pacing. Results A total of 20 patients (age, 62.7 ± 16.6 years; 17 males; 11 with ICM and 9 with NICM) were studied. The number of pacemap-matching LOBs identified from the RVA S1, RVA S2, LVOT S1, and LVOT S2 maps were 0.61 ± 0.70, 1.24 ± 1.09, 1.00 ± 0.85, and 1.50 ± 1.17, respectively. The number of final pacemap-matching LOBs was 1.58 ± 1.07. Two LOBs were visible only during RVA pacing because they were parallel to the conduction direction. Six LOBs were visible only during LVOT pacing—five LOBs were parallel to the conduction direction, and one LOB was located at the wavefront collision area. During a mean follow-up of 9.7 ± 3.3 months, VT recurred in 31.6% of patients. Conclusions A high number of pacemap-matching LOBs on critical substrates can be identified using two-site (RVA and LVOT) pacing DEEP mapping.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Uhm et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Scar-related ventricular tachycardia (n=20). Two-site (RVA and LVOT) pacing decrement-evoked potential (DEEP) mapping was evaluated on Number of pacemap-matching lines of conduction block (LOB). Two-site (RVA and LVOT) pacing decrement-evoked potential mapping identified a mean of 1.58 ± 1.07 pacemap-matching lines of conduction block on critical substrates in patients with scar-related VT.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: