Use of a novel fragmentation map to identify the substrate for ventricular tachycardia in postinfarction cardiomyopathy

Background Substrate ablation is commonly performed in patients with postinfarction cardiomyopathy and ventricular tachycardia (VT). Recognition of fragmented and late potentials during sinus rhythm is a tedious process subject to operator fatigue. Objective The purpose of this study was to assess t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Heart rhythm 2015, Vol.12 (1), p.95-103
Hauptverfasser: Campos, Bieito, MD, Jauregui, Miguel E., MD, Marchlinski, Francis E., MD, FHRS, Dixit, Sanjay, MD, FHRS, Gerstenfeld, Edward P., MS, MD, FHRS
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Substrate ablation is commonly performed in patients with postinfarction cardiomyopathy and ventricular tachycardia (VT). Recognition of fragmented and late potentials during sinus rhythm is a tedious process subject to operator fatigue. Objective The purpose of this study was to assess the value of automated analysis to quantify electrogram fragmentation and to determine the relationship of fragmented regions to the VT isthmus. Methods Detailed left ventricular (LV) mapping was performed in 2 groups: (1) 14 patients with previous myocardial infarction and tolerated VT and (2) 14 controls with structurally normal hearts. In patients with VT, mid-isthmus sites were identified using entrainment mapping. Sinus rhythm endocardial LV electrograms underwent time– and frequency–domain analysis and were displayed as fragmentation or frequency maps. The region of fractionated electrograms and their relation to the VT isthmus sites were determined. Results Cutoffs for abnormal electrogram fragmentation were ventricular fractionation index ≥7 and fast Fourier transform ratio ≥14%, respectively. In the time domain, LV surface area with fractionated electrograms was significantly smaller than the total scar surface area (27.3% ± 7.1% vs 42.1% ± 12.3%, P
ISSN:1547-5271
1556-3871
DOI:10.1016/j.hrthm.2014.10.002