Key result
LGE-CMR correlates poorly with EAM for quantifying atrial fibrosis despite ~97% dichotomous agreement.
Why the study?
Atrial fibrosis contributes to arrhythmia recurrences and thromboembolism in AF, but evidence regarding CMRi as a noninvasive tool for its assessment remains conflicting.
Does CMR-derived atrial fibrosis correlate with EAM-derived low-voltage substrates in ablation-naïve patients with atrial fibrillation?
Population
Sixty ablation-naïve patients with AF scheduled for first-time catheter ablation
Comparison
LGE-CMRi fibrosis thresholds vs high-density EAM low-voltage substrate thresholds
Design
Observational cohort study
Authors
Loading...
May support CMRi fibrosis assessment pre-AF ablation; leaves open its role in risk stratification pending validation.
Observational (n=60)
Does CMR-derived atrial fibrosis correlate with EAM-derived low-voltage substrates in ablation-naïve patients with atrial fibrillation?
Effect estimate: Agreement 0.97 (95% CI 0.92-1.00)
p-value: p=< 0.001
CMR and EAM measures of atrial fibrosis show poor quantitative correlation in ablation-naïve AF patients, indicating that current CMR protocols may not reliably substitute for invasive mapping without further standardization.
Efremidis et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=60). Late gadolinium enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (LGE-CMRi) vs. High-density electroanatomical mapping (EAM) was evaluated on Quantitative correlation and dichotomous agreement between CMR- and EAM-derived fibrosis (Agreement 0.97, 95% CI 0.92-1.00, p=< 0.001). Late gadolinium enhancement CMRi showed poor quantitative correlation with electroanatomical mapping for atrial fibrosis, though dichotomous agreement was high at sensitive thresholds (0.97; P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: