Key result
CMR LGE and 3D fusion imaging are not yet sufficiently accurate to reliably identify left atrial ablation lesions, despite 3D fusion improving sensitivity over LGE alone (88% vs 60%; P=0.003).
Why the study?
Does 3D fusion imaging improve the diagnostic accuracy of detecting left atrial ablation lesions compared to standard LGE imaging in patients undergoing PVI for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation?
Observational (n=50)
Blinded analysis
Yes
Does 3D fusion imaging improve the diagnostic accuracy of detecting left atrial ablation lesions compared to standard LGE imaging in patients undergoing PVI for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Event Rate: 88% vs 60%
p-value: p=0.003
Standard LGE imaging and 3D fusion imaging are not yet sufficiently accurate to reliably identify left atrial ablation lesions or determine their distribution post-PVI.
CMR lesion detection after PVI remains unreliable for routine use; leaves open its value in future lesion-assessment studies.
INTRODUCTION: We tested the hypothesis that cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging can reliably distinguish the presence or absence of left atrial (LA) ablation lesions by blinded analysis of pre- and postablation imaging. METHODS: Consecutive patients at 2 centers undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation by either wide area circumferential radiofrequency ablation (WACA) or ostial ablation with a cryoballoon underwent CMR late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging pre- and 3 months postablation. Imaging was anonymized for blinded analysis of (1) LGE images, and (2) a 3D fusion image with LGE projected onto a segmented LA surface. Scans were categorized using both assessment techniques separately as pre- or postablation, and if postablation, whether lesions were in an ostial or WACA distribution. RESULTS: LGE imaging was performed in 50 patients (aged 60 ± 10 years, 68% male, 24 underwent WACA and 26 had cryoablation). Sensitivity and specificity for detection of ablation lesions was 60% and 96% on LGE imaging. Sensitivity was higher using 3D fusion imaging (88%; P = 0.003). The proportion in whom lesions were both detected and the distribution correctly assessed as WACA or ostial was higher with 3D fusion imaging compared to LGE imaging (54% vs 28%; P = 0.014). There was no difference in the detection of radiofrequency ablation lesions compared to cryoablation lesions (58% vs 62%; P = 1.000). CONCLUSION: LGE imaging of atrial scar is not yet sufficiently accurate to reliably identify ablation lesions or to determine lesion distribution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hunter et al. (2012) conducted an observational in Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (n=50). 3D fusion imaging (LGE projected onto segmented LA surface) vs. LGE imaging alone was evaluated on Sensitivity for detection of ablation lesions (p=0.003). CMR LGE and 3D fusion imaging are not yet sufficiently accurate to reliably identify left atrial ablation lesions, despite 3D fusion improving sensitivity over LGE alone (88% vs 60%; P=0.003).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: