Optimizing Interelectrode Distance for Accurate Mapping of Postinfarct Scars: Insights on Electrogram Characteristics.

IF 8 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Michael Barkagan, Ofir Brem, Arwa Younis, Zachary P Bubar, Jonathan Yarnitsky, Anat Milman, Maxime Zabern, Vladimir Vasilenko, Dor Yadin, Elad Anter
{"title":"Optimizing Interelectrode Distance for Accurate Mapping of Postinfarct Scars: Insights on Electrogram Characteristics.","authors":"Michael Barkagan, Ofir Brem, Arwa Younis, Zachary P Bubar, Jonathan Yarnitsky, Anat Milman, Maxime Zabern, Vladimir Vasilenko, Dor Yadin, Elad Anter","doi":"10.1016/j.jacep.2025.01.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is an ongoing effort to develop catheters with closer interelectrode spacing to improve mapping resolution. However, the optimal distance for mapping postinfarct scar has yet to be established.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study sought to assess the effect of interelectrode distance on ventricular scar electrograms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In 8 swine with healed myocardial infarction, the left ventricle was mapped using an experimental 48-electrode array with a 1.2 mm center-to-center distance. Additional maps with 2.4, 3.6, and 4.8 mm distances were created using nonadjacent electrodes. The impact of interelectrode distance on voltage amplitude and near-field (NF) and far-field (FF) activity relationships was analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At a 1.2 mm interelectrode distance, voltage amplitudes <1.5 mV accurately correlated with the endocardial infarct surface area, while increasing the distance to 4.8 mm progressively overestimated the infarct area (P < 0.001). However, adjusting voltage cutoffs for each interelectrode distance restored the correlation to the actual infarct size. The primary distinction between distances was the ability to differentiate NF from FF potentials. At 4.8 mm and 3.6 mm, FF potential amplitude often exceeded NF amplitude (NF/FF ratios of 0.8 ± 0.3 and 0.9 ± 0.2, respectively). Reducing the distance to 2.4 mm attenuated FF potentials, yielding an NF/FF ratio of 1.2 ± 0.4. Further reduction to 1.2 mm showed no significant additional effect (NF/FF ratio 1.3 ± 0.3; P = 0.09).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bipoles with a 2 mm interelectrode distance most effectively match endocardial scar tissue and attenuate NF potentials. These benefits plateau at 2 mm, suggesting that it may represent the optimal distance for delineating postinfarction substrates.</p>","PeriodicalId":14573,"journal":{"name":"JACC. Clinical electrophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JACC. Clinical electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2025.01.018","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is an ongoing effort to develop catheters with closer interelectrode spacing to improve mapping resolution. However, the optimal distance for mapping postinfarct scar has yet to be established.

Objectives: This study sought to assess the effect of interelectrode distance on ventricular scar electrograms.

Methods: In 8 swine with healed myocardial infarction, the left ventricle was mapped using an experimental 48-electrode array with a 1.2 mm center-to-center distance. Additional maps with 2.4, 3.6, and 4.8 mm distances were created using nonadjacent electrodes. The impact of interelectrode distance on voltage amplitude and near-field (NF) and far-field (FF) activity relationships was analyzed.

Results: At a 1.2 mm interelectrode distance, voltage amplitudes <1.5 mV accurately correlated with the endocardial infarct surface area, while increasing the distance to 4.8 mm progressively overestimated the infarct area (P < 0.001). However, adjusting voltage cutoffs for each interelectrode distance restored the correlation to the actual infarct size. The primary distinction between distances was the ability to differentiate NF from FF potentials. At 4.8 mm and 3.6 mm, FF potential amplitude often exceeded NF amplitude (NF/FF ratios of 0.8 ± 0.3 and 0.9 ± 0.2, respectively). Reducing the distance to 2.4 mm attenuated FF potentials, yielding an NF/FF ratio of 1.2 ± 0.4. Further reduction to 1.2 mm showed no significant additional effect (NF/FF ratio 1.3 ± 0.3; P = 0.09).

Conclusions: Bipoles with a 2 mm interelectrode distance most effectively match endocardial scar tissue and attenuate NF potentials. These benefits plateau at 2 mm, suggesting that it may represent the optimal distance for delineating postinfarction substrates.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JACC. Clinical electrophysiology
JACC. Clinical electrophysiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
250
期刊介绍: JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology is one of a family of specialist journals launched by the renowned Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC). It encompasses all aspects of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of cardiac arrhythmias. Submissions of original research and state-of-the-art reviews from cardiology, cardiovascular surgery, neurology, outcomes research, and related fields are encouraged. Experimental and preclinical work that directly relates to diagnostic or therapeutic interventions are also encouraged. In general, case reports will not be considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信