Contact-force monitoring increases accuracy of right ventricular voltage mapping avoiding “false scar” detection in patients with no evidence of structural heart disease

Purpose: Electroanatomical mapping (EAM) could increase cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) sensitivity in detecting ventricular scar. Possible bias may be scar over-estimation due to inadequate tissue contact. Aim of the study is to evaluate contact-force monitoring influence during EAM, in pa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Luigi Sciarra, Zefferino Palamà, Martina Nesti, Chiara Lanzillo, Mauro Di Roma, Ermenegildo De Ruvo, Antonio Gianluca Robles, Elena Cavarretta, Antonio Scarà, Lucia De Luca, Domenico Grieco, Mariano Rillo, Silvio Romano, Renata Petroni, Maria Penco, Leonardo Calò
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2020-11-01
Series:Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S097262922030084X
Description
Summary:Purpose: Electroanatomical mapping (EAM) could increase cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) sensitivity in detecting ventricular scar. Possible bias may be scar over-estimation due to inadequate tissue contact. Aim of the study is to evaluate contact-force monitoring influence during EAM, in patients with idiopathic right ventricular arrhythmias. Methods: 20 pts (13 M; 43 ± 12 y) with idiopathic right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) arrhythmias and no structural abnormalities were submitted to Smarttouch catheter Carto3 EAM. Native maps included points collected without considering contact-force. EAM scar was defined as area ≥1 cm2 including at least 3 adjacent points with signal amplitude (bipolar <0.5 mV, unipolar 3,5 mV), surrounded by low-voltage border zone. EAM were re-evaluated offline, removing points collected with contact force <5 g. Finally, contact force-corrected maps were compared to the native ones. Results: An EAM was created for each patient (345 ± 85 points). After removing poor contact points, a mean of 149 ± 60 points was collected. The percentage of false scar, collected during contact force blinded mapping compared to total volume, was 6.0 ± 5.2% for bipolar scar and 7.1 ± 5.9% for unipolar scar, respectively. No EAM scar was present after poor contact points removal. Right ventricular areas analysis revealed a greater number of points with contact force < 5 g acquired in free wall, where reduced mean bipolar and unipolar voltage were recorded. Conclusions: To date this is the first work conducted on structurally normal hearts in which contact-force significantly increases EAM accuracy, avoiding “false scar” related to non-adequate contact between catheter and tissue.
ISSN:0972-6292