Asirvatham, Samuel J.

Electromagnetic Interference with Ventricular Assist DeviceBackgroundHemodynamic instability hinders activation and entrainment mapping during ventricular tachycardia ablation. The Impella 2.5 microaxial flow device (MFD; Abiomed Inc., Danvers, MA, USA) is used to prevent hemodynamic instability during electrophysiologic study. However, electromagnetic interference (EMI) generated by this device can preclude accurate electroanatomic mapping.MethodsImpella was placed in the left ventricle of 7 canines for circulatory support. Electroanatomic mapping during sinus rhythm, ventricular pacing, and ventricular fibrillation (VF) was performed using magnet‐ (CARTO3, Biosense Webster Inc., Diamond Bar, CA, USA) and impedance‐ (EnSite Velocity System/EnSite NavX, St. Jude Medical Inc., St. Paul, MN, USA) based systems. Distance from device to points with severe EMI precluding acquisition was compared to points with mild/no EMI. Two methods were used to reduce EMI: (1) titration of MFD performance, and (2) impedance‐only mapping combined with manual annotation of activation.ResultsSevere EMI did not occur during impedance‐based mapping. Severe EMI was observed using CARTO3 at 9.4% of all points attempted at maximum performance level (P8) of device. Severe EMI occurred at points closer to device (40.1 ± 16.8 mm) versus (55.5 ± 20.0 mm) for mild/no EMI, P < 0.0001. Severe EMI using CARTO3 was resolved by either (1) reduction of performance from P8 to P6 or (2) impedance‐only mapping with manual annotation.ConclusionConcurrent use of MFD caused EMI to prevent acquisition of points with magnet‐based mapping. Predictors for EMI were distance from device and performance level. Temporary reductions to P6 or impedance‐only mapping are 2 methods to resolve EMI.

IntroductionAdjudication of thousands of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD)‐treated arrhythmia episodes is labor intensive and, as a result, is most often left undone. The objective of this study was to evaluate an automatic classification algorithm for adjudication of ICD‐treated arrhythmia episodes.MethodsThe algorithm uses a machine learning algorithm and was developed using 776 arrhythmia episodes. The algorithm was validated on 131 dual‐chamber ICD shock episodes from 127 patients adjudicated by seven electrophysiologists (EPs). Episodes were classified by panel consensus as ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) or non‐VT/VF, with the resulting classifications used as the reference. Subsequently, each episode electrogram (EGM) data was randomly assigned to three EPs without the atrial lead information, and to three EPs with the atrial lead information. Those episodes were also classified by the automatic algorithm with and without atrial information. Agreement with the reference was compared between the three EPs consensus group and the algorithm.ResultsThe overall agreement with the reference was similar between three‐EP consensus and the algorithm for both with atrial EGM (94% vs 95%, P = 0.87) and without atrial EGM (90% vs 91%, P = 0.91). The odds of accurate adjudication, after adjusting for covariates, did not significantly differ between the algorithm and EP consensus (odds ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 0.97–1.06).ConclusionsThis algorithm performs at a level comparable to an EP panel in the adjudication of arrhythmia episodes treated by both dual‐ and single‐chamber ICDs. This type of algorithm has the potential for automated analysis of clinical ICD episodes, and adjudication of EGMs for research studies and quality analyses.

The traditional route for teaching cardiac anatomy involves didactic instruction, cadaver dissections, and familiarization with the main structure and relationships of the cardiac chambers, valves, and vasculature. In contemporary cardiac electrophysiology, however, a very different view of anatomy is required including details rarely appreciated with a general overview. In this review, we discuss the critical advances in cardiac electrophysiology that were possible only because of understanding detailed anatomic relationships. While we briefly discuss the clinical relevance, we explain in depth the necessary structural information for the student of clinical anatomy. Interspersed through the text are boxes that highlight and summarize the critical pieces of knowledge to be borne in mind while studying the fascinating structural anatomy of the human heart. Clin. Anat. 27:885–893, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

ECG Lead I and Outflow Tract ArrhythmiaIntroductionOutflow tract ventricular arrhythmia (OTVA) can be complicated to target for ablation when originating from either the periaortic or pulmonary valve (PV) region. Both sites may present with a small R wave in lead V1. However, the utility of lead I in distinguishing these arrhythmia locations is unknown.Methods and ResultsThirty‐six consecutive patients (mean age 41 ± 14 years, 13 male) underwent catheter ablation for OTVA. OTVA origin was determined from intracardiac electrogram tracings and electroanatomic maps. Observers blinded to results measured QRS waveform amplitude and duration from standard 12‐lead ECG tracings. Measurements with highest diagnostic performance were modeled into an algorithm. Sites of successful ablation were anterior right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT; n = 6), posterior RVOT (n = 4), PV (n = 18), and right coronary cusp (RCC; n = 8). Highest performing surface ECG discriminators were from lead I to V1 vectors: RCC, lead I R wave ≥ 1.5 mV, and V1 R wave ≥2.0 mV (sensitivity 87%, specificity 93%); PV, V1 R wave > 0 mV, and lead I R/(R+S) ≤ 0.75 (sensitivity 78%, specificity 72%); anterior RVOT, V1 R wave = 0 mV, and lead I R/(R+S) <0.4 (sensitivity 67%, specificity 97%); posterior RVOT, V1 R wave > 0 mV, and lead I R/(R+S) > 0.75 (sensitivity 75%, specificity 84%). Sequential algorithmic application of these criteria resulted in an overall accuracy of 72% in predicting site of OTVA origin.ConclusionsA relatively large R wave in lead I is seen with RCC origin but not PV origin. A sequential algorithm has limited but potentially significant value beyond assessment of lead I in approaching OTVA.