Alhusseini Mahmood, Vidmar David, Meckler Gabriela L, Kowalewski Christopher A, Shenasa Fatemah, Wang Paul J, Narayan Sanjiv M, Rappel Wouter-Jan
Department of Medicine/Division of Cardiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Department of Physics, University of California, San Diego, California, USA.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017 Jun;28(6):615-622. doi: 10.1111/jce.13177. Epub 2017 Mar 20.
The mechanisms for atrial fibrillation (AF) are unclear in part because diverse mapping techniques yield diverse maps, ranging from stable organized sources to highly disordered waves. We hypothesized that AF mechanisms may be clarified if mapping techniques were compared in the same patients, and referenced to a clinical endpoint. We compared two independent AF mapping techniques in patients in whom ablation terminated persistent AF before pulmonary vein isolation (PVI).
We identified 12 patients with persistent AF (61.2 ± 10.8 years, four female) in whom mapping with 64 pole baskets and technique 1 (activation/phase mapping, FIRM) identified rotational activation patterns during at least 50% of the 4-second mapping interval and targeted ablation at these rotational sites terminated AF to sinus rhythm (n = 10) or atrial tachycardia. We analyzed the unipolar electrograms of these patients to determine phase maps of activation by an independent technique 2 (Kuklik, Schotten et al., IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2015). Compared to technique 1, technique 2 revealed a source in 12 of 12 (100%) cases with spatial concordance in all cases (P <0.05) and similar rotational characteristics.
At sites where ablation terminated persistent AF, two independent mapping techniques identified stable rotational activation for multiple cycles that drove peripheral disorder. Future comparative studies referenced to a clinical endpoint may help reconcile if discrepancies between AF mapping studies reports represent techniques, patient populations or models of AF, and improve mapping to better guide ablation.
心房颤动(AF)的机制尚不清楚,部分原因是不同的标测技术产生不同的图谱,范围从稳定的有组织的起源到高度紊乱的波。我们假设,如果在同一患者中比较标测技术并参考临床终点,AF机制可能会得到阐明。我们在肺静脉隔离(PVI)前消融终止持续性AF的患者中比较了两种独立的AF标测技术。
我们确定了12例持续性AF患者(61.2±10.8岁,4例女性),其中使用64极篮状电极和技术1(激活/相位标测,FIRM)进行标测时,在4秒标测间期的至少50%时间内识别出旋转激活模式,并且在这些旋转部位进行靶向消融使AF终止为窦性心律(n = 10)或房性心动过速。我们分析了这些患者的单极电图,以通过独立的技术2(Kuklik、Schotten等人,《IEEE生物医学工程汇刊》,2015年)确定激活的相位图。与技术1相比,技术2在12例中的12例(100%)病例中均发现了起源,所有病例在空间上均具有一致性(P<0.05)且旋转特征相似。
在消融终止持续性AF的部位,两种独立的标测技术识别出多个周期的稳定旋转激活,这些激活驱动了外周的紊乱。未来参考临床终点的比较研究可能有助于协调AF标测研究报告之间的差异是代表技术、患者群体还是AF模型,并改善标测以更好地指导消融。