Evidence Hub

Usefulness of epicardial impedance evaluation for epicardial mapping and determination of epicardial ablation site for ventricular tachycardia: A pilot study

Kitamura T, Fukamizu S, Miyazawa S, Kawamura I, Hojo R, Aoyama Y, Nishizaki M, Sakurada H et al.

Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology, 2018

7 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During epicardial mapping, determination of appropriate ablation sites in low voltage areas (LVA) is challenging because of large epicardial areas covered by adipose tissue.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impedance difference between epicardial fat and the epicardial LVA using multiple detector computed tomography (MDCT).

METHODS: We enrolled patients who underwent ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation via the epicardial approach after endocardial ablation failure. After the procedure, MDCT-derived images of epicardial fat were loaded to the mapping system. Then, all points acquired during sinus rhythm were retrospectively superimposed and analyzed.

RESULTS: This study included data from 7 patients (62.5 ± 3.9 years old) who underwent eight epicardial VT ablation procedures. After the procedure, MDCT-derived images of epicardial fat were registered in eight procedures. Retrospective analysis of 1,595 mapping and 236 ablation points was performed. Of the 1,595 mapping points on the merged electroanatomical and epicardial fat maps, normal voltage area (NVA) and low voltage area (LVA) without fat had lower impedance than those with fat (NVA without fat 182 ± 46 Ω vs. NVA with fat 321 ± 164.0 Ω, P = 0.001, LVA without fat 164 ± 69 Ω vs. LVA with fat 248 ± 89 Ω, P = 0.002). Of the 236 ablation points, initial impedance before ablation was higher on epicardial fat than on epicardial LVA without fat (134 ± 16 Ω vs. 156 ± 28 Ω, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS: Real time epicardial…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 7 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free