Key result
The VIVO non-invasive mapping system correctly identified the origin of premature ventricular complexes in 75% of patients, though its accuracy was highly sensitive to the use of patient-specific anatomical models and precise time marker placement.
Why the study?
The clinical value of non-invasive mapping systems depends on accuracy under common input variations, prompting evaluation of the VIVO system's performance and sensitivity to anatomical model changes, time marker placement, and body position.
Does the VIVO non-invasive mapping system accurately localize the origin of ventricular arrhythmias compared to invasive electrophysiological studies, and how robust is it to input variations?
Observational (n=48)
Unblinded
No
Does the VIVO non-invasive mapping system accurately localize the origin of ventricular arrhythmias compared to invasive electrophysiological studies, and how robust is it to input variations?
The VIVO non-invasive mapping system can localize ventricular arrhythmias with 75% accuracy, but its reliability is highly dependent on using patient-specific anatomical models and precise time marker placement.
VIVO performance may vary with input changes; leaves open reliability for routine ventricular arrhythmia localization.
Background: The clinical value of non-invasive mapping system depends on its accuracy under common variations of the inputs. The View Into Ventricular Onset (VIVO) system matches simulated QRS complexes of a patient-specific anatomical model with a 12-lead ECG to estimate the origin of ventricular arrhythmias. We aim to test the performance of the VIVO system and its sensitivity to changes in the anatomical model, time marker placement to demarcate the QRS complex and body position. Methods: Non-invasive activation maps of idiopathic premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) using a patient-specific or generic anatomical model were matched with the location during electrophysiological studies. Activation maps were analyzed before and after systematically changing the time marker placement. Morphologically identical PVCs recorded in supine and sitting position were compared in a subgroup. Results: Non-invasive activation maps of 48 patients (age 51 ± 14 years, 28 female) were analyzed. The origin of the PVCs as determined by VIVO system matched with the clinical localization in 36/48 (75%) patients. Mismatches were more common for PVCs of left than right ventricular origin [11/27 (41%) vs. 1/21 (5%) of cases, p < 0.01]. The first 32 cases were analyzed for robustness testing of the VIVO system. Changing the patient-specific vs. the generic anatomical model reduced the accuracy from 23/32 (72%) to 15/32 (47%), p < 0.05. Time marker placement in the QRS complex (delayed onset or advanced end marker) or in the ST-segment (delaying the QRS complex end marker) resulted in progressive shifts in origins of PVCs. Altered body positions did not change the predicted origin of PVCs in most patients [clinically unchanged 11/15 (73%)]. Conclusion: VIVO activation mapping is sensitive to changes in the anatomical model and time marker placement but less to altered body position.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lesina et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Idiopathic premature ventricular complexes and/or ventricular tachycardias (n=48). View Into Ventricular Onset (VIVO) non-invasive mapping system vs. Invasive electrophysiological study (electro-anatomical mapping) was evaluated on Clinical match of premature ventricular complex origin between the VIVO system and invasive electrophysiological study. The VIVO non-invasive mapping system correctly identified the origin of premature ventricular complexes in 75% of patients, though its accuracy was highly sensitive to the use of patient-specific anatomical models and precise time marker placement.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: