Validation of a machine learning algorithm to identify pulmonary vein isolation during ablation procedures for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: results of the PVISION study.

AIMS: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the cornerstone of ablation for atrial fibrillation. Confirmation of PVI can be challenging due to the presence of far-field electrograms (EGMs) and sometimes requires additional pacing manoeuvres or mapping. This prospective multicentre study assessed the agreement between a previously trained automated algorithm designed to determine vein isolation status with expert opinion in a real-world clinical setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients scheduled for PVI were recruited at four centres. The ECGenius electrophysiology (EP) recording system (CathVision ApS, Copenhagen, Denmark) was connected in parallel with the existing system in the laboratory. Electrograms from a circular mapping catheter were annotated during sinus rhythm at baseline pre-ablation, time of isolation, and post-ablation. The ground truth for isolation status was based on operator opinion. The algorithm was applied to the collected PV signals off-line and compared with expert opinion. The primary endpoint was a sensitivity and specificity exceeding 80%. Overall, 498 EGMs (248 at baseline and 250 at PVI) with 5473 individual PV beats from 89 patients (32 females, 62 ± 12 years) were analysed. The algorithm performance reached an area under the curve (AUC) of 92% and met the primary study endpoint with a sensitivity and specificity of 86 and 87%, respectively (P = 0.005; P = 0.004). The algorithm had an accuracy rate of 87% in classifying the time of isolation. CONCLUSION: This study validated an automated algorithm using machine learning to assess the isolation status of pulmonary veins in patients undergoing PVI with different ablation modalities. The algorithm reached an AUC of 92%, with both sensitivity and specificity exceeding the primary study endpoints.

Prediction of certainty in artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiography.

BACKGROUND: The 12­lead ECG provides an excellent substrate for artificial intelligence (AI) enabled prediction of various cardiovascular diseases. However, a measure of prediction certainty is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To assess a novel approach for estimating certainty of AI-ECG predictions. METHODS: Two convolutional neural networks (CNN) were developed to predict patient age and sex. Model 1 applied a 5 s sliding time-window, allowing multiple CNN predictions. The consistency of the output values, expressed as interquartile range (IQR), was used to estimate prediction certainty. Model 2 was trained on the full 10s ECG signal, resulting in a single CNN point prediction value. Performance was evaluated on an internal test set and externally validated on the PTB-XL dataset. RESULTS: Both CNNs were trained on 269,979 standard 12­lead ECGs (82,477 patients). Model 1 showed higher accuracy for both age and sex prediction (mean absolute error, MAE 6.9 ± 6.3 years vs. 7.7 ± 6.3 years and AUC 0.946 vs. 0.916, respectively, P < 0.001 for both). The IQR of multiple CNN output values allowed to differentiate between high and low accuracy of ECG based predictions (P < 0.001 for both). Among 10% of patients with narrowest IQR, sex prediction accuracy increased from 65.4% to 99.2%, and MAE of age prediction decreased from 9.7 to 4.1 years compared to the 10% with widest IQR. Accuracy and estimation of prediction certainty of model 1 remained true in the external validation dataset. CONCLUSIONS: Sliding window-based approach improves ECG based prediction of age and sex and may aid in addressing the challenge of prediction certainty estimation.

Feasibility and safety of left bundle branch area pacing in patients with septal hypertrophy.

INTRODUCTION: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) aims to provide physiological ventricular activation during pacing. Left ventricular septal hypertrophy (LVSH) might be challenging for LBBAP due to the thickness of the interventricular septum and potential presence of septal scar. This study assesses the feasibility, safety, and outcome of LBBAP in patients with LVSH using primarily stylet-driven leads (SDL). METHODS: Adult patients with LVSH who underwent LBBAP between March 2019 and November 2022 were enrolled. Baseline patient characteristics, procedural data and postprocedural results were collected. The feasibility of LBBAP in LVSH patients was compared to a cohort of LBBAP patients with normal septal wall thickness (NST). RESULTS: Seventeen LVSH and 133 NST patients underwent LBBAP with successful implantation achieved in 15 LVSH patients (88%). Mean implant depth was 17.2 ± 1.9 mm, with 53% proven left bundle branch (LBB) capture. Paced QRS duration (146 ± 14 ms) and V6 R-wave peak time (V6 RWPT; 79 ± 20 ms) were comparable between patients with and without septal hypertrophy, although patients with NST had higher rates of proven LBB capture (71% vs. 53%). In LVSH pacing thresholds (0.6 ± 0.3 V at 0.4 ms) and R-wave amplitude (13.9 ± 5.6 mV) were favorable and remained stable at follow-up. At 12 months, 87% of patients had stable or improved left ventricular ejection fraction. CONCLUSION: The results of the study indicate that LBBAP in patients with LVSH is safe and feasible and no lead-related complications were observed despite a mean implant depth exceeding 15 mm. LBBAP using SDL results in favorable pacing and electrocardiographic characteristics in LVSH patients, comparable to patients with NST.

EHRA clinical consensus statement on conduction system pacing implantation: endorsed by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), Canadian Heart Rhythm Society (CHRS), and Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS).

Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a more physiological alternative to right ventricular pacing and is also being used in selected cases for cardiac resynchronization therapy. His bundle pacing was first introduced over two decades ago and its use has risen over the last five years with the advent of tools which have facilitated implantation. Left bundle branch area pacing is more recent but its adoption is growing fast due to a wider target area and excellent electrical parameters. Nevertheless, as with any intervention, proper technique is a prerequisite for safe and effective delivery of therapy. This document aims to standardize the procedure and to provide a framework for physicians who wish to start CSP implantation, or who wish to improve their technique.

EHRA clinical consensus statement on conduction system pacing implantation: executive summary. Endorsed by the Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), Canadian Heart Rhythm Society (CHRS) and Latin-American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS).

Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a more physiological alternative to right ventricular pacing and is also being used in selected cases for cardiac resynchronization therapy. His bundle pacing was first introduced over two decades ago and its use has risen over the last years with the advent of tools which have facilitated implantation. Left bundle branch area pacing is more recent but its adoption is growing fast due to a wider target area and excellent electrical parameters. Nevertheless, as with any intervention, proper technique is a prerequisite for safe and effective delivery of therapy. This document aims to standardize the procedure and to provide a framework for physicians who wish to start CSP implantation, or who wish to improve their technique. A synopsis is provided in this print edition of EP-Europace. The full document may be consulted online, and a 'Key Messages' App can be downloaded from the EHRA website.

Left bundle branch area pacing outcomes: the multicentre European MELOS study.

AIMS: Permanent transseptal left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is a promising new pacing method for both bradyarrhythmia and heart failure indications. However, data regarding safety, feasibility and capture type are limited to relatively small, usually single centre studies. In this large multicentre international collaboration, outcomes of LBBAP were evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a registry-based observational study that included patients in whom LBBAP device implantation was attempted at 14 European centres, for any indication. The study comprised 2533 patients (mean age 73.9 years, female 57.6%, heart failure 27.5%). LBBAP lead implantation success rate for bradyarrhythmia and heart failure indications was 92.4% and 82.2%, respectively. The learning curve was steepest for the initial 110 cases and plateaued after 250 cases. Independent predictors of LBBAP lead implantation failure were heart failure, broad baseline QRS and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter. The predominant LBBAP capture type was left bundle fascicular capture (69.5%), followed by left ventricular septal capture (21.5%) and proximal left bundle branch capture (9%). Capture threshold (0.77 V) and sensing (10.6 mV) were stable during mean follow-up of 6.4 months. The complication rate was 11.7%. Complications specific to the ventricular transseptal route of the pacing lead occurred in 209 patients (8.3%). CONCLUSIONS: LBBAP is feasible as a primary pacing technique for both bradyarrhythmia and heart failure indications. Success rate in heart failure patients and safety need to be improved. For wider use of LBBAP, randomized trials are necessary to assess clinical outcomes.

Initial experience of left bundle branch area pacing using stylet-driven pacing leads: A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been performed exclusively using lumen-less pacing leads (LLL) with fixed helix design. This registry study explores the safety and feasibility of LBBAP using stylet-driven leads (SDL) with extendable helix design in a multicenter patient population. METHODS: This study prospectively enrolled consecutive patients who underwent LBBAP for bradycardia pacing or heart failure indications at eight Belgian hospitals. LBBAP was attempted using SDL (Solia S60; Biotronik) delivered through dedicated delivery sheath (Selectra3D). Implant success, complications, procedural, and pacing characteristics were recorded at implant and follow-up. RESULTS: The study enrolled 353 patients (mean age 76 ± 39 years, 43% female). The mean number of implants per center was 25 (range: 5-162). Overall, LBBAP with SDL was successful in 334/353 (94%), varying from 93% to 100% among centers. Pacing response was labeled as left bundle branch pacing in 73%, whereas 27% were labeled as myocardial capture. Mean paced QRS duration and stimulus to left ventricular activation time measured 126 ± 21 ms and 74 ± 17. SDL-LBBAP resulted in low pacing thresholds (0.6 ± 0.4 V at 0.4 ms), which remained stable at 12 months follow-up (0.7 ± 0.3, p = .291). Lead revisions for SDL-LBBAP occurred in 5 (1.4%) patients occurred during a mean follow up of 9 ± 5 months. Five (1.4%) septal coronary artery fistulas and 8 (2%) septal perforations occurred, none of them causing persistent ventricular septal defects. CONCLUSION: The use of SDL to achieve LBBAP is safe and feasible, characterized by high implant success in low and high volume centers, low complication rates, and stable low pacing thresholds.

Left bundle branch area pacing using stylet-driven pacing leads with a new delivery sheath: A comparison with lumen-less leads.

INTRODUCTION: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) aims to achieve physiological pacing by capturing the conduction system in the area of the left bundle branch. LBBAP has exclusively been performed using lumen-less pacing leads (LLLs) with fixed helix design. This study explores the feasibility, safety, and pacing characteristics of LBBAP using stylet-driven leads (SDLs) with an extendable helix design. METHODS: Patients, in which LBBAP was attempted for bradycardia or heart failure pacing indications, were prospectively enrolled at the Ghent University Hospital. LBBAP was attempted with two different systems: 1/LLL with fixed helix (SelectSecure 3830, Medtronic Inc.) delivered through a preshaped sheath (C315His Medtronic Inc.) and 2/SDL with extendable helix (Solia S60, Biotronik, SE & CO) delivered through a new delivery sheath (Selectra 3D, Biotronik). RESULTS: The study enrolled 50 patients (mean age: 70 ± 14 years, 44% females). LBBAP with SDL was successful in 20/23 (87%) patients compared with 24/27 (89%) of patients in the LLL group (p = 0.834). Screw attempts, screw implant depth, procedural, and fluoroscopy times were comparable among both groups. Acute LBBAP thresholds were low and comparable between SDL and LLL (0.5 ± 0.15 V vs. 0.4 ± 0.17 V, p = 0.251). Pacing thresholds remained low at 3 ± 2.1 months of follow up in both groups and no lead revisions were necessary. Postprocedural echocardiography revealed a septal coronary artery fistula in one patient with SDLLBBAP. CONCLUSION: LBBAP using stylet-driven pacing leads is feasible and yields comparable implant success to LBBAP with LLLs. LBBAP thresholds are low and comparable with both types of leads.

Predictors of recurrence after durable pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) reduces AF recurrence, AF burden, and improves quality of life. Data on clinical and procedural predictors of arrhythmia recurrence are scarce and are flawed by the high rate of pulmonary vein reconnection evidenced during repeat procedures after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). In this study, we identified clinical and procedural predictors for AF recurrence 1 year after CLOSE-guided PVI, as this strategy has been associated with an increased PVI durability. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with paroxysmal AF, who received CLOSE-guided PVI and who participated in a prospective trial in our centre, were included in this study. Uni- and multivariate models were plotted to find clinical and procedural predictors for AF recurrence within 1 year. Three hundred twenty-five patients with a mean age of 63 years (CHA2DS2VASc 1 [1-3], left atrium diameter 41 ± 6 mm) were included. About 60.9% were male individuals. After 1 year, AF recurrence occurred in 10.5% of patients. In a binary logistic regression analysis, the diagnosis-to-ablation time (DAT) was found to be the strongest predictor of AF recurrence (P = 0.011). Diagnosis-to-ablation time ≥1 year was associated with a nearly two-fold increased risk for developing AF recurrence. CONCLUSION: The DAT is the most important predictor of arrhythmia recurrence in low-risk patients treated with durable pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal AF. Whether reducing the DAT could improve long-term outcomes should be investigated in another trial.

Perimembranous ventricular septal defect following His bundle lead implantation.

His bundle pacing (HBP) offers physiologic pacing by placing the pacing lead directly to the His bundle. We present a case in which a HBP lead, implanted at the fragile membranous septum, resulted in a persistent restrictive perimembranous ventricular septal defect (VSD). This complication of HBP has not been reported before but brings new insights in the discussion regarding the optimal position of a pacing lead in the ventricular septum. The fragility of the membranous septum and low rate of spontaneous closure of membranous VSD, might favor lead placement in the muscular septum when aiming for physiologic pacing.

His bundle pacing for newly acquired pacing needs in patients implanted with a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator: A feasibility study based on the automated screening score and clinical cases.

INTRODUCTION: Management of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) patients with newly acquired pacing needs remains problematic. His bundle pacing (HBP) allows for cardiac pacing without significant changes in the QRS morphology. We hypothesized that HBP does not alter S-ICD sensing and functions. METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients were implanted with a HB pacemaker. Among them, 17 demonstrated successful His recruitment and were prospectively screened with the automated screening tool (AST). Results of screenings performed immediately after implant and during follow-up, during intrinsic rhythm and while pacing from all available pacing configurations, were compared using the AST score. Positive-screening tests were defined by greater than or equal to 1 positive vector. RESULTS: Among the 17 patients successfully implanted (male: 41%; mean age: 73), 13 presented an indication of ventricular pacing and four of cardiac resynchronization. Absolute AST scores during both HBP (all configurations) and intrinsic rhythm were similar (p: NS). Due to left bundle branch block correction, HBP resulted in higher number of positive vectors (AST ≥ 100). AST scores were higher during HBP when compared with right ventricular pacing (RVP) (primary vector: 272 [16; 648] vs 4.6 [0.8; 16.2]; P = .003; secondary vector: 569 [183; 1186] vs 1.5 [0.7; 8.3]; P < .0001; alternate vector: 44 [2;125] vs 4.8 [0.9; 9.3]; P = .02) and resulted in a much higher number of positive vectors. Up to 90% of the patients had a positive-screening test during HBP. This passing rate was higher when compared RVP (17%; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: HBP restores normal intrinsic conduction and minimally modifies the surface electrocardiograph and subcutaneous electrograms. When ventricular pacing is needed, HBP might represent an ideal pacing option for patients implanted with a S-ICD.

Feasibility of His-bundle pacing in patients with conduction disorders following transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Conduction disorders requiring permanent pacemaker implantation occur frequently after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). This multicenter study explored the feasibility and safety of His bundle pacing (HBP) in TAVR patients with a pacemaker indication to correct a TAVR-induced left bundle branch block (LBBB). METHODS: Patients qualifying for a permanent pacemaker implant after TAVR were planned for HBP implant. HBP was performed using the Select Secure (3830; Medtronic) pacing lead, delivered through a fixed curve or deflectable sheath (C315HIS or C304; Medtronic). Successful HBP was defined as selective or nonselective HBP, irrespective of LBB recruitment. Successful LBBB correction was defined as selective or nonselective HBP resulting in paced QRS morphology similar to pre-TAVR QRS and paced QRS duration (QRSd) less than 120 milliseconds with thresholds less than 3.0 V at 1.0-millisecond pulse width. RESULTS: The study enrolled 16 patients requiring a permanent pacemaker after TAVR (age 85 ± 4 years, 31% female, all LBBB; QRSd: 161 ± 14 milliseconds). Capture of the His bundle was achieved in 13 of 16 (81%) patients. HBP with LBBB correction was achieved in 11 of 16 (69%) and QRSd narrowed from 162 ± 14 to 99 ± 13 milliseconds and 134 ± 7 milliseconds during S-HBP and NS-HBP, respectively (P = .005). At implantation, mean threshold for LBBB correction was 1.9 ± 1.1 V at 1.0 millisecond. Thresholds remained stable at 11 ± 4 months follow-up (1.8 ± 0.9 V at 1.0 millisecond, P = .231 for comparison with implant thresholds). During HBP implant, one temporary complete atrioventricular block occurred. CONCLUSION: Permanent HBP is feasible in the majority of patients with TAVR requiring a permanent pacemaker with the potential to correct a TAVR-induced LBBB with acceptable pacing thresholds.

Diagnostic accuracy of R-wave detection by insertable cardiac monitors.

BACKGROUND: Insertable cardiac monitors (ICM) allow prolonged rhythm monitoring, but the diagnostic performance can be hampered by false positive arrhythmia alerts related to inadequate R-wave sensing. This study assesses the prevalence and predictors of inadequate R-wave sensing (both over- and undersensing) among different ICM types. METHODS: Patients implanted with an ICM at Ghent University Hospital between January 2017 and August 2018 were included. ICM tracings recorded at interrogation or transmitted by remote monitoring were reviewed for inadequate R-wave sensing leading to false arrhythmia alerts. Patient and implant characteristics were retrieved from the medical records and implant reports. RESULTS: The study screened 135 patients (age 59 ± 19 years, 44% female) implanted with different ICM types: Reveal LINQ™ and XT (Medtronic): n = 92 (68%), Confirm and Confirm Rx (Abbott): n = 35 (26%), and BioMonitor 2 (Biotronik): n = 8 (6%). ICM tracings were analyzed in 112 patients (83%). False arrhythmia alerts occurred in 22 (20%) patients, most frequently related to undersensing (77%). False diagnosis of bradycardia or pause was documented in 64%, false high ventricular rates in 14%, and false atrial fibrillation alerts in 22%. Occurrence of R-wave changes was not related to patient characteristics or implant R-wave sensing. A trend toward higher number of inadequate R-wave sensing seems to occur with nonparasternal implant sites (P = .074). CONCLUSIONS: False arrhythmia alerts due to inadequate R-wave sensing occurred in 20% of ICM patients independent of implant features and patient characteristics.

Progression of incomplete toward complete left bundle branch block: A clinical and electrocardiographic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Complete left bundle branch block (cLBBB) is associated with increased cardiovascular mortality and heart failure. On the contrary, the clinical relevance of incomplete left bundle branch block (iLBBB) is less known. This study investigated the profile and outcome of iLBBB patients and assessed the risk of progression to cLBBB. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with iLBBB between July 2013 and April 2018 were retrospectively included. Subsequently, echo- and electrocardiographic examinations at time of iLBBB diagnosis and during follow-up, as well as progression to non-strict cLBBB and strict cLBBB, were evaluated. RESULTS: The study enrolled 321 patients (33% female, age 74 ± 11 years). During the follow-up of 21 (8;34) months, 33% of iLBBB patients evolved to non-strict cLBBB and 27% to strict cLBBB. iLBBB patients who evolved to non-strict or strict cLBBB were older, had more frequently reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, and had more often QRS notching/slurring in the lateral leads and inferior leads, compared to patients without progression to cLBBB. In multivariate analysis, only QRS notching/slurring in the lateral leads was independently associated with progression to non-strict cLBBB (odds ratio 4.64, p < .001) and strict cLBBB (odds ratio 9.6, p < .001). iLBBB patients with QRS notching/slurring had a progression rate to non-strict cLBBB of 52% and 49% to strict cLBBB. CONCLUSION: Among patients with iLBBB, up to one third of the patients progress to cLBBB within a period of 2 years. The presence of QRS notching/slurring in the lateral leads during iLBBB was the strongest predictor for progression toward cLBBB.

Different dynamics of new-onset electrocardiographic changes after balloon- and self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Implications for prolonged heart rhythm monitoring.

BACKGROUND: New onset electrocardiographic (ECG) changes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are used to assess the risk for late atrioventricular block. However, the time of ECG evaluation remains controversial. We aimed to compare the time course and dynamics of new onset ECG changes according to valve design in balloon- (BEV) and self-expandable (SEV) TAVR. METHODS AND RESULTS: This single center study enrolled 133 consecutive TAVR patients (28.6% SEV, 71.4% BEV). Patients with pre-existent permanent pacemaker implant (PPMI), procedural death or incomplete ECG registration were excluded. Standard 12­lead ECG was performed before the procedure, at 1, 24, 48 and 120 h and 1 month. In BEV patients, no significant PR prolongation occurred, whereas in SEV patients the PR interval prolonged significantly with 33.7 ± 22.0 ms (p < 0.001, compared to pre-TAVR) but only after 48 h after TAVR. Widening of QRS duration was comparable among both BEV and SEV patients (6.7 ± 21.5 versus 17.0 ± 26.9 ms, p = 0.061) and occurred immediately after TAVR. New-onset left bundle branch block was seen in 18.5% of BEV and 30.8% of SEV patients (p = 0.120) and occurred within 24 h after TAVR in both groups. Late PPMI (>24 h after TAVR) was higher in SEV compared to BEV patients (15.3% versus 1.5%, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Self-expandable valves cause more impairment in atrioventricular conduction with a delayed time course compared to balloon expandable valves. This might explain the higher pacemaker need beyond 24 h after TAVR. Our findings suggest that patients with self-expandable valves require at least 48 h ECG monitoring post TAVR.

Evaluation of a simple technique aiming at optimizing point-by-point isolation of the left pulmonary veins: a randomized study.

AIMS: We sought to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of a simple technique for stabilizing the ablation catheter during anterior pulmonary vein (PV) encirclement in patients ablated for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. This consisted of bending the ablation catheter in the left atrium, creating a loop that was cautiously advanced together with the long sheath at the ostium and then within the left superior PV. The curve was then progressively released to reach a stable contact with the anterior part of the left PVs. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eighty consecutive patients (age 64 ± 11 years, left atrial diameter 43 ± 8 mm) undergoing 'CLOSE'-guided PV isolation were prospectively randomized into two groups depending on whether the loop technique was used or not. When using the loop technique, the encirclement of the left PVs was shorter [20 min (interquartile range, IQR 17-24) vs. 26 min (IQR 18-33), P < 0.01] with a high rate of first pass isolation [(100%) vs. (97%), P = 0.9] and adenosine proof isolation [(93%) vs. (95%), P = 0.67]. Most specifically, at the anterior part of the left PVs, there were less dislocations [0 (IQR 0-0) vs. 1 (IQR 0-4), P < 0.001], radiofrequency duration was shorter (272 ± 85 s vs. 378 ± 122 s, P < 0.001), force-time integral was higher [524 gs (IQR 427-687) vs. 398 gs (IQR 354-451), P < 0.001], average contact force was higher [20 g (IQR 13-27) vs. 11g (IQR 9-16), P < 0.001], and impedance drop was higher [12 Ω (IQR 9-19) vs. 10 Ω (IQR 7-14), P < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: This study describes a simple technique to facilitate catheter stability at the anterior part of the left PVs, resulting in more efficient left PV encirclement without compromising safety.

Failure to detect life-threatening arrhythmias in ICDs using single-chamber detection criteria.

BACKGROUND: There are anecdotal reports of sudden death despite a functional implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). We sought to describe scenarios leading to fatal or near-fatal outcome due to inappropriately inhibited ICD therapy in devices programmed with single-chamber detection criteria. METHODS: Programmed settings, episode lists, and intracardiac electrograms from 24 patients with a life-threatening event (n = 12) or fatal outcome (n = 12) related to failed ventricular arrhythmia detection were used to clarify the underlying scenario. RESULTS: Fifty episodes of failed ventricular arrhythmia detection were identified and categorized into six scenarios: (1) spontaneous ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) with a rate below the detection limits, (2) misclassification of polymorphic VT (PVT) or VF as supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), (3) misclassification of VT/VF as cluster of nonsustained VT episodes, (4) misclassification of monomorphic VT (MVT) as SVT, (5) inappropriate shock abortion, and (6) false termination detection. These scenarios occurred respectively 6, 9, 3, 9, 8, and 15 times. In 9/9 (100%) patients with PVT/VF classified as SVT, rate stability was active for rates ranging from 222 to 250 beats/min. MVT detected as SVT was due to the sudden onset criterion in 7/9 (78%) patients and twice a consequence of the rate stability criterion active for rates ranging from 200 to 250 beats/min. CONCLUSION: We describe six scenarios leading to failure of ventricular arrhythmia detection in a single-chamber detection setting withholding life-saving therapy. These scenarios are more likely to occur with high-rate programming and long detection times, especially if combined with rate stability and sudden onset.

Clinical assessment and comparison of annotation algorithms in high-density mapping of regular atrial tachycardias.

BACKGROUND: High-density automated mapping of regular atrial tachycardias (ATs) requires accurate assessment of local activation times (LATs). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate high-density mapping of ATs and compare the accuracy of different automated LAT annotation algorithms. METHODS: Fifteen patients underwent AT ablation guided by the automated ConfiDENSEۛ high-density mapping module (Carto 3 v4) allowing manual reannotation (edited maps). For each AT, unedited automated maps were reconstructed offline by three algorithms: maximum unipolar slope (LATSlope ), bipolar peak (LATPeak ), and a new hybrid annotation algorithm (LATHybrid ). Five blinded experts were asked to define the (1) tachycardia mechanism, (2) ablation target, and (3) level of difficulty of these unedited maps. RESULTS: Twenty-one ATs (cycle length 300 ± 46 ms, activation points 955 ± 421) were successfully ablated using LATHybrid guided ablation with manual editing in a small number of points. At 6 months, 14 (93%) of the patients were free of AT recurrences. Unedited LATHybrid maps showed the highest accuracy in defining the tachycardia mechanism (LATHybrid : 49% vs. LATPeak : 27% vs. LATSlope : 28%, P < 0.001) and ablation target (LATHybrid : 65% vs. LATPeak : 39% vs. LATSlope : 31%, P < 0.001). Overall, LATHybrid -annotated maps were graded as "easier to interpret" by the experts (difficulty score 2.3 ± 0.9) versus LATPeak (2.8 ± 1) and LATSlope (3.2 ± 0.8) (P < 0.001). Only 12% of the LATHybrid maps were annotated as uninterpretable compared to 31% of LATSlope and 45% of the LATPeak maps (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Automated LATHybrid annotation allows better and easier recognition of the tachycardia mechanism compared to automated LATPeak and LATSlope algorithms, although fully automated mapping still requires further improvements.

Evaluation of left atrial linear ablation using contiguous and optimized radiofrequency lesions: the ALINE study.

Aims: Achieving block across linear lesions is challenging. We prospectively evaluated radiofrequency (RF) linear ablation at the roof and mitral isthmus (MI) using point-by-point contiguous and optimized RF lesions. Methods and results: Forty-one consecutive patients with symptomatic persistent AF underwent stepwise contact force (CF)-guided catheter ablation during ongoing AF. A single linear set of RF lesions was delivered at the roof and posterior MI according to the 'Atrial LINEar' (ALINE) criteria, i.e. point-by-point RF delivery (up to 35 W) respecting strict criteria of contiguity (inter-lesion distance ≤ 6 mm) and indirect lesion depth assessment (ablation index ≥550). We assessed the incidence of bidirectional block across both lines only after restoration of sinus rhythm. After a median RF time of 7 min [interquartile range (IQR) 5-9], first-pass block across roof lines was observed in 38 of 41 (93%) patients. Final bidirectional roof block was achieved in 40 of 41 (98%) patients. First-pass block was observed in 8 of 35 (23%) MI lines, after a median RF time of 8 min (IQR 7-12). Additional endo- and epicardial (54% of patients) RF applications resulted in final bidirectional MI block in 28 of 35 (80%) patients. During a median follow-up of 396 (IQR 310-442) days, 12 patients underwent repeat procedures, with conduction recovery in 4 of 12 and 5 of 10 previously blocked roof lines and MI lines, respectively. No complications occurred. Conclusion: Anatomical linear ablation using contiguous and optimized RF lesions results in a high rate of first-pass block at the roof but not at the MI. Due to its complex 3D architecture, the MI frequently requires additional endo- and epicardial RF lesions to be blocked.