Is a single lethal electric field threshold sufficient to characterize the lesion size in computational modeling of cardiac pulsed-field ablation?

IF 2.5 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Argyrios Petras PhD , Gerard Amoros Figueras PhD , Zoraida Moreno Weidmann MD , Tomás García-Sánchez PhD , David Viladés Medel MD, PhD , Antoni Ivorra PhD , Jose M. Guerra MD, PhD , Luca Gerardo-Giorda PhD
{"title":"Is a single lethal electric field threshold sufficient to characterize the lesion size in computational modeling of cardiac pulsed-field ablation?","authors":"Argyrios Petras PhD ,&nbsp;Gerard Amoros Figueras PhD ,&nbsp;Zoraida Moreno Weidmann MD ,&nbsp;Tomás García-Sánchez PhD ,&nbsp;David Viladés Medel MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Antoni Ivorra PhD ,&nbsp;Jose M. Guerra MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Luca Gerardo-Giorda PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.hroo.2025.02.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) is a novel cardiac ablation technology based on irreversible electroporation (IRE). PFA computational models rely on identification of a lethal electric field threshold to predict the IRE area. However, the predicted lesion anisotropy ratios (width over depth) vary extensively among recent studies, and these discrepancies remain a subject of discussion.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This work aims to evaluate the predicted lesion anisotropy ratios using a PFA computational model by applying it to an open-chest in vivo porcine model geometry.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Six domestic swine underwent epicardial PFA applications using a previously described waveform protocol. Animals were killed at least 3 hours after the last ablation, and lesions were assessed using triphenyltetrazolium chloride (TTC) staining. Numeric simulations were performed on a segmented and meshed porcine thoracic computed tomography (CT) scan, mimicking the open-chest experimental setup.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The maximum width of all simulated lesions was observed at the epicardial surface. The anisotropy ratios (AR) of the experimental lesions were smaller than the simulated ones (AR experimental vs simulated, 1.0–1.7 vs 2–2.7; Q1–Q3 quartiles). Increasing the peak voltage resulted in larger lesions; however, the computational model clearly underestimated the increase in lesion depth compared with the experimental data.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Our computational model shows that a single lethal electric field threshold is insufficient to accurately predict both lesion depth and width in cardiac PFA. Our study suggests that for the given PFA waveforms, a threshold between 270 and 500 V/cm provides satisfactory lesion depth estimations, and a higher threshold between 790 and 1000 V/cm better captures the lesion width.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":29772,"journal":{"name":"Heart Rhythm O2","volume":"6 5","pages":"Pages 671-677"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart Rhythm O2","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666501825000790","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) is a novel cardiac ablation technology based on irreversible electroporation (IRE). PFA computational models rely on identification of a lethal electric field threshold to predict the IRE area. However, the predicted lesion anisotropy ratios (width over depth) vary extensively among recent studies, and these discrepancies remain a subject of discussion.

Objective

This work aims to evaluate the predicted lesion anisotropy ratios using a PFA computational model by applying it to an open-chest in vivo porcine model geometry.

Methods

Six domestic swine underwent epicardial PFA applications using a previously described waveform protocol. Animals were killed at least 3 hours after the last ablation, and lesions were assessed using triphenyltetrazolium chloride (TTC) staining. Numeric simulations were performed on a segmented and meshed porcine thoracic computed tomography (CT) scan, mimicking the open-chest experimental setup.

Results

The maximum width of all simulated lesions was observed at the epicardial surface. The anisotropy ratios (AR) of the experimental lesions were smaller than the simulated ones (AR experimental vs simulated, 1.0–1.7 vs 2–2.7; Q1–Q3 quartiles). Increasing the peak voltage resulted in larger lesions; however, the computational model clearly underestimated the increase in lesion depth compared with the experimental data.

Conclusion

Our computational model shows that a single lethal electric field threshold is insufficient to accurately predict both lesion depth and width in cardiac PFA. Our study suggests that for the given PFA waveforms, a threshold between 270 and 500 V/cm provides satisfactory lesion depth estimations, and a higher threshold between 790 and 1000 V/cm better captures the lesion width.
在心脏脉冲场消融的计算模型中,单一致死电场阈值是否足以表征病变大小?
脉冲场消融(PFA)是一种基于不可逆电穿孔(IRE)的新型心脏消融技术。PFA计算模型依赖于致命电场阈值的识别来预测IRE区域。然而,在最近的研究中,预测的病变各向异性比率(宽度比深度)差异很大,这些差异仍然是讨论的主题。目的:利用PFA计算模型对猪开胸模型的几何形状进行预测,评估病变各向异性比率。方法6头家猪采用先前描述的波形方案进行心外膜PFA应用。动物在最后一次消融后至少3小时被杀死,并用三苯基四氮唑氯(TTC)染色评估病变。数值模拟在猪胸部分段和网格计算机断层扫描(CT)上进行,模拟开胸实验设置。结果所有模拟病灶的最大宽度均在心外膜表面。实验病变的各向异性比(AR)小于模拟病变(AR实验vs模拟,1.0 ~ 1.7 vs 2 ~ 2.7;Q1-Q3四分位数)。峰值电压越大,病变越大;然而,与实验数据相比,计算模型明显低估了病变深度的增加。结论我们的计算模型显示单一致死电场阈值不足以准确预测心脏PFA病变深度和宽度。我们的研究表明,对于给定的PFA波形,270至500 V/cm之间的阈值可以提供令人满意的病变深度估计,而790至1000 V/cm之间的更高阈值可以更好地捕获病变宽度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Heart Rhythm O2
Heart Rhythm O2 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
52 days
×
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