4.1 Article

Locating Atrial Fibrillation Rotor and Focal Sources Using Iterative Navigation of Multipole Diagnostic Catheters

Journal

CARDIOVASCULAR ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 10, Issue 2, Pages 354-366

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13239-019-00414-5

Keywords

Atrial fibrillation; Electrogram signal processing; Non-pulmonary-vein source detection; Patient-specific ablation strategy development; AF ablation target detection

Funding

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) [7R15HL127663-02]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PurposeMulti-polar diagnostic catheters are used to construct the 3D electro-anatomic mapping of the atrium during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation procedures; however, it remains unclear how to use the electrograms recorded by these catheters to locate AF-driving sites known as focal and rotor source types. The purpose of this study is to present the first algorithm to iteratively navigate a circular multi-polar catheter to locate AF focal and rotor sources without the need to map the entire atria.MethodsStarting from an initial location, the algorithm, which was blinded to the location and type of the AF source, iteratively advanced a Lasso catheter based on its electrogram characteristics. The algorithm stopped the catheter when it located of an AF source and identified the type. The efficiency of the algorithm is validated using a set of simulated focal and rotor-driven arrhythmias in fibrotic human 2D and 3D atrial tissue.ResultsOur study shows the feasibility of locating AF sources with a success rate of greater than 95.25% within average 7.562.28 placements independently of the initial position of the catheter and the source type.ConclusionsThe algorithm could play a critical role in clinical electrophysiology laboratories for mapping patient-specific ablation of AF sources located outside the pulmonary veins and improving the procedure success.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available