In simulated data, the OP-EGM method estimated conduction velocity with a mean error of 0.08 mm/ms compared to 0.007 mm/ms for the LAT-based method, while producing smoother patterns in clinical data.
Does the OP-EGM method accurately estimate atrial propagation parameters compared to LAT-based methods in simulated and clinical data?
The OP-EGM method provides coherent and smooth conduction velocity maps in clinical data independent of local activation time annotation errors, despite slightly higher errors in simplified simulated models.
Absolute Event Rate: 0.08% vs 0.007%
Omnipolar Electrogram (OP-EGM) is a recently proposed technique to characterize myocardial propagation in multi-electrode catheters regardless of the angle between propagation direction and catheter bipolar. This work aims to evaluate the accuracy of atrial propagation parameters obtained with OP-EGM in sinus rhythm (SR) and in different patterns of atrial fibrillation (AF).Real and simulated unipolar electrograms (u-EGMs) were used in this study. For both types of data, conduction velocity was obtained for each clique of 4 neighbour electrodes using OP-EGM. As a reference, conduction velocity was also computed from local activation times (LATs) using a linear propagation model.Analysis of simulated data showed that conduction velocity had good concordance with propagation patterns for both estimations, although the LAT-based errors were lower in most of the cases. When conduction velocity magnitude (CV) was 1 mm/ms, its estimation errors (expressed as mean ± std) calculated with OP-EGM and from LATs were 0.053 ± 0.005 mm/ms and 0.003 ±2.1 ×10-5 mm/ms, respectively, when focus was at 30 mm from the bottom of the tissue slice, while propagation direction angular errors were 6.64 ± 4.3°and 4.35 ± 2.8°. In real data, maps obtained with OP-EGM presented smoother and more coherent patterns than those based on LATs.
Riccio et al. (Sun,) conducted a other in Atrial Fibrillation (n=1). Omnipolar Electrogram (OP-EGM) method vs. Local Activation Times (LAT)-based estimation was evaluated on Mean conduction velocity estimation error in simulated data (mm/ms). In simulated data, the OP-EGM method estimated conduction velocity with a mean error of 0.08 mm/ms compared to 0.007 mm/ms for the LAT-based method, while producing smoother patterns in clinical data.