1. Multielectrode vs. point-by-point mapping for ventricular tachycardia substrate ablation: a randomized study.
- Author
-
Acosta J, Penela D, Andreu D, Cabrera M, Carlosena A, Vassanelli F, Alarcón F, Soto-Iglesias D, Korshunov V, Borras R, Linhart M, Martínez M, Fernández-Armenta J, Mont L, and Berruezo A
- Subjects
- Action Potentials, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cardiac Catheterization adverse effects, Cardiac Catheterization instrumentation, Cardiac Catheters, Catheter Ablation adverse effects, Catheter Ablation instrumentation, Female, Heart Conduction System physiopathology, Heart Rate, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Operative Time, Pilot Projects, Predictive Value of Tests, Spain, Tachycardia, Ventricular diagnosis, Tachycardia, Ventricular physiopathology, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Cardiac Catheterization methods, Catheter Ablation methods, Electrophysiologic Techniques, Cardiac instrumentation, Heart Conduction System surgery, Tachycardia, Ventricular surgery
- Abstract
Aims: Ventricular tachycardia (VT) substrate ablation is based on detailed electroanatomical maps (EAM). This study analyses whether high-density multielectrode mapping (MEM) is superior to conventional point-by-point mapping (PPM) in guiding VT substrate ablation procedures., Methods and Results: This was a randomized controlled study (NCT02083016). Twenty consecutive ischemic patients undergoing VT substrate ablation were randomized to either group A [n = 10; substrate mapping performed first by PPM (Navistar) and secondly by MEM (PentaRay) ablation guided by PPM] or group B [n = 10; substrate mapping performed first by MEM and second by PPM ablation guided by MEM]. Ablation was performed according to the scar-dechanneling technique. Late potential (LP) pairs were defined as a Navistar-LP and a PentaRay-LP located within a three-dimensional distance of ≤ 3 mm. Data obtained from EAM, procedure time, radiofrequency time, and post-ablation VT inducibility were compared between groups. Larger bipolar scar areas were obtained with MEM (55.7±31.7 vs. 50.5±26.6 cm2; P = 0.017). Substrate mapping time was similar with MEM (19.7±7.9 minutes) and PPM (25±9.2 minutes); P = 0.222. No differences were observed in the number of LPs identified within the scar by MEM vs. PPM (73±50 vs. 76±52 LPs per patient, respectively; P = 0.965). A total of 1104 LP pairs were analysed. Using PentaRay, far-field/LP ratio was significantly lower (0.58±0.4 vs. 1.64±1.1; P = 0.01) and radiofrequency time was shorter [median (interquartile range) 12 (7-20) vs. 22 (17-33) minutes; P = 0.023]. No differences were observed in VT inducibility after procedure., Conclusion: MEM with PentaRay catheter provided better discrimination of LPs due to a lower sensitivity for far-field signals. Ablation guided by MEM was associated with a shorter radiofrequency time.
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF