Identification of Circumferential Pulmonary Vein Isolation Gaps and Critical Atrial Substrate From HD Grid Maps in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Insights From Omnipolar Technology

Omnipolar Versus Bipolar Electrode Mapping in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Catheter Ablation

BACKGROUND

Peak-to-peak bipolar voltage varies with electrode orientation, fractionation, and collision events. Novel, omnipolar mapping is less dependent on electrode orientation but has limited data in humans.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare bipolar peak-to-peak voltage with omnipolar maximum voltage (Vmax) during sinus rhythm in the left atrium of patients with persistent (PerAF) or paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF).

METHODS

Baseline voltage maps were generated with bipolar and omnipolar mapping in 20 patients undergoing de novo catheter ablation for PerAF or PAF and 9 patients with known scar from prior cardiac surgery, to validate voltage-based scar approximations. Low voltage was defined as <0.5 mV and scar <0.1 mV. Mean voltage was compared with unpaired t testing. Percent low voltage and scar were compared with chi-square testing. A point-to-point comparison was performed with Bland-Altman analysis.

RESULTS

The mean age was 62.2 ± 9.9 years, 34% were women, and 41% had heart failure. Omnipolar mapping identified significantly higher mean voltage than bipolar mapping and classified less points as low voltage (PerAF: 32.90% vs 43.40%; PAF: 19.20% vs 25.60%) and scar (PerAF: 7.72% vs 12.10%; PAF: 4.03% vs 6.07%) (all P < 0.0001). Omnipolar Vmax displayed significant disagreement with bipolar by Bland-Altman analysis. Scar and low-voltage approximations were validated in atria with known scar, in which bipolar mapping overestimated the extent of low voltage (P < 0.0001) and scar (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Omnipolar mapping identifies higher voltage and has greater specificity for the detection of low voltage and scar than conventional bipolar mapping in patients with PerAF or PAF.

Atrial conduction velocity mapping: clinical tools, algorithms and approaches for understanding the arrhythmogenic substrate

Characterizing patient-specific atrial conduction properties is important for understanding arrhythmia drivers, for predicting potential arrhythmia pathways, and for personalising treatment approaches. One metric that characterizes the health of the myocardial substrate is atrial conduction velocity, which describes the speed and direction of propagation of the electrical wavefront through the myocardium. Atrial conduction velocity mapping algorithms are under continuous development in research laboratories and in industry. In this review article, we give a broad overview of different categories of currently published methods for calculating CV, and give insight into their different advantages and disadvantages overall. We classify techniques into local, global, and inverse methods, and discuss these techniques with respect to their faithfulness to the biophysics, incorporation of uncertainty quantification, and their ability to take account of the atrial manifold.