Premium
Toward Magnetic Resonance‐Guided Electroanatomical Voltage Mapping for Catheter Ablation of Scar‐Related Ventricular Tachycardia: A Comparison of Registration Methods
Author(s) -
TAO QIAN,
MILLES JULIEN,
VAN HULS VAN TAXIS CARINE,
LAMB HILDO J.,
REIBER JOHAN H.C.,
ZEPPENFELD KATJA,
VAN DER GEEST ROB J.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.193
H-Index - 138
eISSN - 1540-8167
pISSN - 1045-3873
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2011.02167.x
Subject(s) - medicine , ablation , ventricular tachycardia , translation (biology) , catheter ablation , image registration , magnetic resonance imaging , fluoroscopy , cardiac ablation , nuclear medicine , artificial intelligence , radiology , image (mathematics) , computer science , biochemistry , chemistry , messenger rna , gene
Toward MR‐Guided Electroanatomical Voltage Mapping for Catheter Ablation. Introduction: Integration of preprocedural delayed enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DE‐MRI) with electroanatomical voltage mapping (EAVM) may provide additional high‐resolution substrate information for catheter ablation of scar‐related ventricular tachycardias (VT). Accurate and fast image integration of DE‐MRI with EAVM is desirable for MR‐guided ablation.Methods and Results:Twenty‐six VT patients with large transmural scar underwent catheter ablation and preprocedural DE‐MRI. With different registration models and EAVM input, 3 image integration methods were evaluated and compared to the commercial registration module CartoMerge. The performance was evaluated both in terms of distance measure that describes surface matching, and correlation measure that describes actual scar correspondence. Compared to CartoMerge, the method that uses the translation‐and‐rotation model and high‐density EAVM input resulted in a registration error of 4.32±0.69 mm as compared to 4.84 ± 1.07 (P <0.05); the method that uses the translation model and high‐density EAVM input resulted in a registration error of 4.60 ± 0.65 mm (P = NS); and the method that uses the translation model and a single anatomical landmark input resulted in a registration error of 6.58 ± 1.63 mm (P < 0.05). No significant difference in scar correlation was observed between all 3 methods and CartoMerge (P = NS).Conclusions:During VT ablation procedures, accurate integration of EAVM and DE‐MRI can be achieved using a translation registration model and a single anatomical landmark. This model allows for image integration in minimal mapping time and is likely to reduce fluoroscopy time and increase procedure efficacy. (J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 23, pp. 74‐80, January 2012)