Azzolin Luca, Schuler Steffen, Dössel Olaf, Loewe Axel
Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany.
Front Physiol. 2021 Apr 1;12:656411. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2021.656411. eCollection 2021.
In both clinical and computational studies, different pacing protocols are used to induce arrhythmia and non-inducibility is often considered as the endpoint of treatment. The need for a standardized methodology is urgent since the choice of the protocol used to induce arrhythmia could lead to contrasting results, e.g., in assessing atrial fibrillation (AF) vulnerabilty. Therefore, we propose a novel method-pacing at the end of the effective refractory period (PEERP)-and compare it to state-of-the-art protocols, such as phase singularity distribution (PSD) and rapid pacing (RP) in a computational study. All methods were tested by pacing from evenly distributed endocardial points at 1 cm inter-point distance in two bi-atrial geometries. Seven different atrial models were implemented: five cases without specific AF-induced remodeling but with decreasing global conduction velocity and two persistent AF cases with an increasing amount of fibrosis resembling different substrate remodeling stages. Compared with PSD and RP, PEERP induced a larger variety of arrhythmia complexity requiring, on average, only 2.7 extra-stimuli and 3 s of simulation time to initiate reentry. Moreover, PEERP and PSD were the protocols which unveiled a larger number of areas vulnerable to sustain stable long living reentries compared to RP. Finally, PEERP can foster standardization and reproducibility, since, in contrast to the other protocols, it is a parameter-free method. Furthermore, we discuss its clinical applicability. We conclude that the choice of the inducing protocol has an influence on both initiation and maintenance of AF and we propose and provide PEERP as a reproducible method to assess arrhythmia vulnerability.
在临床和计算研究中,不同的起搏方案被用于诱发心律失常,而不可诱发性通常被视为治疗的终点。由于用于诱发心律失常的方案选择可能导致相互矛盾的结果,例如在评估房颤(AF)易感性方面,因此迫切需要一种标准化的方法。因此,我们提出了一种新方法——在有效不应期结束时起搏(PEERP),并在一项计算研究中将其与诸如相位奇点分布(PSD)和快速起搏(RP)等最先进的方案进行比较。所有方法均通过在两种双心房几何结构中以1厘米的点间距从均匀分布的心内膜点进行起搏来测试。实施了七种不同的心房模型:五种情况没有特定的房颤诱发重塑,但全局传导速度降低,以及两种持续性房颤情况,伴有越来越多的纤维化,类似于不同的基质重塑阶段。与PSD和RP相比,PEERP诱发的心律失常复杂性种类更多,平均只需额外2.7个刺激和3秒的模拟时间即可引发折返。此外,与RP相比,PEERP和PSD揭示了更多易发生持续稳定长时间折返的区域。最后,PEERP可以促进标准化和可重复性,因为与其他方案不同,它是一种无参数方法。此外,我们还讨论了其临床适用性。我们得出结论,诱发方案的选择对房颤的起始和维持都有影响,并且我们提出并提供PEERP作为一种可重复的方法来评估心律失常易感性。