Masuda Masaharu, Asai Mitsutoshi, Iida Osamu, Okamoto Shin, Ishihara Takayuki, Nanto Kiyonori, Kanda Takashi, Tsujimura Takuya, Matsuda Yasuhiro, Okuno Shota, Tsuji Aki, Mano Toshiaki
Cardiovascular Center, Kansai Rosai Hospital, Amagasaki, Japan.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2019 May;42(5):515-520. doi: 10.1111/pace.13644. Epub 2019 Mar 25.
Smaller low-voltage areas (LVAs) obtained by multielectrode catheters were reported than those by linear ablation catheters. However, the underlying electrogram difference has not been elucidated. This study aimed to compare the two mapping catheters' measurements of electrogram waveforms and LVAs.
This prospective observational study included 17 consecutive patients undergoing ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation. Following pulmonary vein isolation, voltage mapping during sinus rhythm was performed once using the ablation catheter, and once using the multielectrode catheter. Approximately 20 pairs of mapping points at approximately the same position between the two voltage maps were manually selected evenly throughout the left atrium.
Voltage mapping with the multielectrode catheter demonstrated smaller LVAs, defined as <0.50 mV (5.9 [3.3, 11.0] vs 9.7 [6.6, 16.9] cm ) than those mapped with the ablation catheter. The two mapping catheters' voltage amplitudes of all pairs of mapping points correlated well (r = 0.81, P < 0.0001) overall, but they did not correlate within diseased areas (either voltage <0.50 mV). The voltage amplitude difference between the two catheters ([Vol - Vol ]/Vol × 100) was greater in the diseased areas (37.4% [-9.8%, 147%]) than in the healthy areas (both voltages ≥0.50 mV, 26.2% [-13.0%, 92.8%], P = 0.014). The electrogram waveform of the multiple electrode catheter displayed a higher voltage amplitude, shorter duration, greater number of peaks, and lower dull peak ratio (number of dull peaks/total peaks) than that of the ablation catheter.
The multielectrode catheter produced smaller LVA measurements with sharper and higher voltage electrograms compared to the ablation catheter, specifically in diseased areas.
据报道,与线性消融导管相比,多电极导管获得的低电压区(LVA)更小。然而,潜在的电图差异尚未阐明。本研究旨在比较两种标测导管对电图波形和LVA的测量结果。
这项前瞻性观察性研究纳入了17例连续接受持续性房颤消融治疗的患者。在肺静脉隔离后,分别使用消融导管和多电极导管在窦性心律下进行一次电压标测。在整个左心房中均匀手动选择大约20对位于两个电压图大致相同位置的标测点。
与消融导管标测的结果相比,多电极导管进行电压标测显示的LVA更小,定义为<0.50mV(5.9[3.3,11.0] vs 9.7[6.6,16.9]cm²)。总体而言,所有标测点对的两种标测导管的电压幅度相关性良好(r = 0.81,P < 0.0001),但在病变区域(电压<0.50mV)内不相关。病变区域中两种导管之间的电压幅度差异([Vol₁ - Vol₂]/Vol₁×100)大于健康区域(两者电压≥0.50mV,26.2%[-13.0%,92.8%],P = 0.014)。与消融导管相比,多电极导管的电图波形显示出更高的电压幅度、更短的持续时间、更多的峰值以及更低的钝峰比(钝峰数量/总峰值数量)。
与消融导管相比,多电极导管产生的LVA测量值更小,电图更尖锐且电压更高,特别是在病变区域。