Utility and limitations of coherent mapping algorithm utilizing vectors and global propagation patterns in atrial tachycardia

Yagishita, Atsuhiko; Sakama, Susumu; Ayabe, Kengo; Amino, Mari; Ikari, Yuji; Yoshioka, Koichiro

doi:10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101193

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yajishita et al demonstrated through coherent mapping that different reentrant mechanisms were focal in atypical ATs. 16 Our work often showed that coherent mapping presented a pseudo-reentrant AT in the scar area, with RM demonstrating no reentrant circuits (Figure 2; Video 1-2).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

The value of ripple mapping in the age of coherent mapping in scar‐related atrial tachycardia

Shen,

Pan,

Liu

et al. 2024

Pacing Clinical Electrophis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAn accurate display of scar‐related atrial tachycardia (ATs) is a key determinant of ablation success. The efficacy of ripple mapping (RM) in identifying the mechanism and critical isthmus of scar‐related ATs during coherent mapping is unknown.MethodsA total of 97 patients with complex ATs who underwent radiofrequency catheter ablation at our center between October 2018 and September 2022 were included. ATs was mapped using a multielectrode mapping catheter on the CARTO3v7 CONFIDENCE module. Coherent and RM were used to identify the reentrant circuit.ResultsThe mechanisms of 128 ATs were analyzed retrospectively (84 anatomic‐reentrant ATs and 44 non‐anatomic reentrant ATs). The median AT cycle length was 264 ± 25ms. The correct diagnosis was achieved in 83 ATs (68%) using only coherent mapping. Through coherent mapping plus RM, 114 ATs (84.2%) were correctly diagnosed (68% vs. 89%, p = .019). In non‐anatomical reentrant ATs, 81% of the diagnostic rate was achieved by reviewing both coherent and ripple mapping compared to reviewing coherent mapping alone (81% vs. 52%, p = .03). Reviewing coherent mapping and ripple mapping showed a higher diagnostic rate in patients who underwent cardiac surgery than those with Coherent mapping alone (64% vs. 88%, p = .04).ConclusionCoherent mapping combined with RM was superior to coherent mapping alone in identifying the mechanism of scar‐related ATs post‐cardiac surgery and non‐anatomic reentrant ATs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%