3.8 Proceedings Paper

Body-Surface Atrial Vector Similarity as a New Way to Investigate Atrial Fibrillation Propagation Dynamics

期刊

出版社

IEEE
DOI: 10.22489/CinC.2021.133

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated the recurrent activity of atrial fibrillation at the level of the body surface by measuring the similarity between consecutive atrial vectors in patients with persistent AF. Findings revealed a quasi-periodic behavior of the atrial vectors, with alternating phases of slow and fast motion. The amount of slow phases positively correlated with a higher long-term recurrent behavior of atrial propagation patterns.
Atrial propagation patterns during atrial fibrillation (AF) can be characterized by a certain degree of recurrence (associated with different types of reentrant circuits that can drive the arrhythmia). In this study, we investigated this recurrent activity at the level of the bodysurface, by measuring the level of similarity between pairs of consecutive atrial vectors. High-density body surface potential maps (120 anterior, 64 posterior electrodes) were recorded in 75 patients in persistent AF. For each patient, atrial vectors were created by taking the samples from all electrodes at each time instant. Similarity between consecutive vectors was measured in terms of the value of the cosine of the angle between two vectors. In all patients, the series of cosine values showed a quasi-periodic behavior, with atrial vectors alternating between phases of slow motion, and phases of fast motion. Moreover, the frequency of this behavior is about twice the AF dominant frequency, which suggests that within one AF cycle there are two phases of slow motion and two of fast motion, alternating. Finally, the amount of slow phases is positively correlated with a higher long-term recurrent behavior of the atrial propagation patterns. This seems to indicate that atrial vectors may provide a new way to noninvasively investigate atrial fibrillation dynamics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据