Associations between fully-automated, 3D-based functional analysis of the left atrium and classification schemes in atrial fibrillation

A comprehensive evaluation of the left atrium using cardiovascular magnetic resonance

Atrial disease or myopathy is a growing concept in cardiovascular medicine, particularly in the context of atrial fibrillation, as well as amyloidosis and heart failure. Among cardiac imaging modalities, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is particularly well suited for a comprehensive assessment of atrial myopathy, including tissue characterization and hemodynamics. The goal of this review article is to describe clinical applications and make recommendations on pulse sequences as well as imaging parameters to assess the left atrium and left atrial appendage. Furthermore, we aimed to create an overview of current and promising future emerging applications of left atrium-specific CMR pulse sequences focusing on both electrophysiologic (EP) and non-EP applications.

Associations between 3D-based Left Atrial Volumetric and Blood Flow Parameters in a Single-Site Cohort of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis

Purpose To investigate associations between left atrial volume (LAV) and function with impaired three-dimensional hemodynamics from four-dimensional flow MRI. Materials and Methods A subcohort of participants from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis from Northwestern University underwent prospective 1.5-T cardiac MRI including whole-heart four-dimensional flow and short-axis cine imaging between 2019 and 2020. Four-dimensional flow MRI analysis included manual three-dimensional segmentations of the LA and LA appendage (LAA), which were used to quantify LA and LAA peak velocity and blood stasis (% voxels < 0.1 m/sec). Short-axis cine data were used to delineate LA contours on all cardiac time points, and the resulting three-dimensional-based LAVs were extracted for calculation of LA emptying fractions (LAEFtotal, LAEFactive, LAEFpassive). Stepwise multivariable linear models were calculated for each flow parameter (LA stasis, LA peak velocity, LAA stasis, LAA peak velocity) to determine associations with LAV and LAEF. Results This study included 158 participants (mean age, 73 years ± 7 [SD]; 83 [52.5%] female and 75 [47.4%] male participants). In multivariable models, a 1-unit increase of LAEFtotal was associated with decreased LA stasis (β coefficient, -0.47%; P < .001), while increased LAEFactive was associated with increased LA peak velocity (β coefficient, 0.21 cm/sec; P < .001). Furthermore, increased minimum LAV indexed was most associated with impaired LAA flow (higher LAA stasis [β coefficient, 0.65%; P < .001] and lower LAA peak velocity [β coefficient, -0.35 cm/sec; P < .001]). Conclusion Higher minimum LAV and reduced LA function were associated with impaired flow characteristics in the LA and LAA. LAV assessment might therefore be a surrogate measure for LA and LAA flow abnormalities. Keywords: Atherosclerosis, Left Atrial Volume, Left Atrial Blood Flow, 4D Flow MRI Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2024.

Atrial substrate characterization based on bipolar voltage electrograms acquired with multipolar, focal and mini-electrode catheters

BACKGROUND

Bipolar voltage (BV) electrograms for left atrial (LA) substrate characterization depend on catheter design and electrode configuration.

AIMS

The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between the BV amplitude (BVA) using four catheters with different electrode design and to identify their specific LA cutoffs for scar and healthy tissue.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive high-resolution electroanatomic mapping was performed using a multipolar-minielectrode Orion catheter (Orion-map), a duo-decapolar circular mapping catheter (Lasso-map), and an irrigated focal ablation catheter with minielectrodes (Mifi-map). Virtual remapping using the Mifi-map was performed with a 4.5 mm tip-size electrode configuration (Nav-map). BVAs were compared in voxels of 3 × 3 × 3 mm3. The equivalent BVA cutoff for every catheter was calculated for established reference cutoff values of 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 mV. We analyzed 25 patients (72% men, age 68 ± 15 years). For scar tissue, a 0.5 mV cutoff using the Nav corresponds to a lower cutoff of 0.35 mV for the Orion and of 0.48 mV for the Lasso. Accordingly, a 0.2 mV cutoff corresponds to a cutoff of 0.09 mV for the Orion and of 0.14 mV for the Lasso. For healthy tissue cutoff at 1.5 mV, a larger BVA cutoff for the small electrodes of the Orion and the Lasso was determined of 1.68 and 2.21 mV, respectively.

CONCLUSION

When measuring LA BVA, significant differences were seen between focal, multielectrode, and minielectrode catheters. Adapted cutoffs for scar and healthy tissue are required for different catheters.

Quantification of left atrial function by the area-length method overestimates left atrial emptying fraction

PURPOSE

The biplane area-length method is commonly used in cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) to assess left atrial (LA) volume (LAV) and function. Associations between left atrial emptying fraction (LAEF) and clinical outcomes have been reported. However, only limited data are available on the calculation of LAEF using the biplane method compared to 3D assessment. This study aimed to compare volumetric and functional LA parameters obtained from the biplane method with 3D assessment in a large, multiethnic cohort.

METHOD

158 participants of MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) underwent CMR that included standard two- and four-chamber steady-state free precession (SSFP) cine imaging for the biplane method. For 3D-based assessment, short-axis SSFP cine series covering the entire LA were obtained, followed by manual delineation of LA contours to create a time-resolved 3D LAV dataset. Paired t-tests and Bland-Altman plots were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Standard volumetric assessment showed that LAVmin (bias: -8.35 mL, p < 0.001), LAVmax (bias: -9.38 mL, p < 0.001) and LAVpreA (bias: -10.27 mL, p < 0.001) were significantly smaller using the biplane method compared to 3D assessment. Additionally, the biplane method reported significantly higher LAEFtotal (bias: 7.22 %, p < 0.001), LAEFactive (bias: 6.08 %, p < 0.001), and LAEFpassive (bias: 4.51 %, p < 0.001) with wide limits of agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

LA volumes were underestimated using the biplane method compared to 3D assessment, while LAEF parameters were overestimated. These findings demonstrate a lack of precision using the biplane method for LAEF assessment. Our results support the usage of 3D assessment in specific settings when LA volumetric and functional parameters are in focus.