Background— Accurate activation mapping of reentrant scar-related atrial tachycardias (AT) allows efficient radiofrequency ablation by targeting the critical isthmus (CI). We aimed to assess the electrophysiological properties of CI channels during mapping with the IntellaMap Orion basket and the Rhythmia system. Methods and Results— We prospectively studied 33 AT (post– atrial fibrillation ablation or surgical mitral valve repair). The noise of bipolar electrogram (EGM) was systematically measured at 10 prespecified sites, as well as on a standard catheter and on the surface ECG. Bipolar EGM of CI regions were analyzed for amplitude, duration, and conduction velocity. The isthmus region to be targeted was chosen based solely on propagation. For each AT, 25 684±14 276 EGMs were automatically annotated. Noise of the Orion EGM was 0.011±0.004 mV, lower than that of a standard catheter (0.016±0.019) and surface ECG (0.02±0.01; P <0.05). For reentrant AT, within the CI, bipolar EGM amplitude (0.08±0.11 mV) and conduction velocity (0.27±0.19 m/s) were lower than those orthodromically before (0.62±0.93 mV; 1±0.49 m/s) and after (0.80±1.59 mV; 1±0.73 m/s) the isthmus ( P <0.001 for all). In 97% of AT, ablation at the CI resulted in AT termination. No complications occurred. Conclusions— This new automated ultrahigh resolution mapping system produces low noise and allows accurate diagnosis of AT circuits. CI on reentrant scar-related AT showed much lower EGM amplitude with a significantly slower conduction velocity than the surrounding parts of the circuit. Ablation of the areas of slow conduction resulted in a high acute success.

Left ventricular non-compaction (LV NC) is characterized by abnormal trabeculations that are mainly at the LV apex. Distinction between LV NC and non-specific dilated cardiomyopathies (DCMs) remains often challenging. We sought to find additive tools comparing the longitudinal strain characteristics of LVNC versus idiopathic DCM in a cohort of patients. 48 cases of LVNC (derivation cohort) were compared with 45 cases of DCM. Global and regional multi-layer (sub-endocardial, mid-wall, and sub-epicardial) LV longitudinal strain analysis was performed. Results were compared to define the best tool for distinguishing LVNC from DCM. A validation cohort (41 LVNC patients) was then used to assess the performance of the proposed diagnostic tools. In the derivation cohort, longitudinal deformation (strain) was greater in LVNC than in DCM patients. Longitudinal shortening was greater in the non-compacted segments than in the compacted ones. A mid-wall strain base-apex gradient had 88.4 % sensitivity and 66.7 % specificity in distinguishing LVNC from DCM (AUC = 0.83; cut-off of -23 or |0.23|%). In a multivariable model, the base-apex mid-wall gradient in an apical 4-chamber view was the only independent echocardiographic criteria (OR = 0.76, CI 95 % [0.66; 0.90], p = 0.0010) allowing the distinction between LVNC and DCM. In the validation cohort, the base-apex mid-wall gradient of strain had 88.4 % sensitivity, 85.7 % negative predictive values for the diagnosis of LVNC. Longitudinal strain, especially the base-apex longitudinal gradient of strain, appears as an additive valuable tool for distinguishing LVNC from DCM.

No abstract

No abstract