The new diagnostic algorithm using native T1 can reliably discriminate between health and disease and determine the clinical disease stage in patients with a clinical diagnosis of myocarditis.

No abstract

Real-time CMR-guided LV lead placement is feasible and achievable in a single clinical setting and may prove helpful to preferentially select sites for LV lead placement.

In the setting of cardiac perforation, CT is the imaging modality of choice. Transvenous lead extraction can be recommended as a safe, efficacious, and versatile intervention.

BackgroundOptimal lead positioning is an important determinant of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate cardiac computed tomography (CT) selection of the optimal epicardial vein for left ventricular (LV) lead placement by targeting regions of late mechanical activation and avoiding myocardial scar.MethodsEighteen patients undergoing CRT upgrade with existing pacing systems underwent preimplant electrocardiogram-gated cardiac CT to assess wall thickness, hypoperfusion, late mechanical activation, and regions of myocardial scar by the derivation of the stretch quantifier for endocardial engraved zones (SQUEEZ) algorithm. Cardiac venous anatomy was mapped to individualized American Heart Association (AHA) bull’s-eye plots to identify the optimal venous target and compared with acute hemodynamic response (AHR) in each coronary venous target using an LV pressure wire.ResultsFifteen data sets were evaluable. CT-SQUEEZ–derived targets produced a similar mean AHR compared with the best achievable AHR (20.4% ± 13.7% vs 24.9% ± 11.1%; P = .36). SQUEEZ-derived guidance produced a positive AHR in 92% of target segments, and pacing in a CT-SQUEEZ target vein produced a greater clinical response rate vs nontarget segments (90% vs 60%).ConclusionPreprocedural CT-SQUEEZ–derived target selection may be a valuable tool to predict the optimal venous site for LV lead placement in patients undergoing CRT upgrade.

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to identify the optimal pacing site for the left ventricular (LV) lead in ischemic patients with poor response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).BackgroundLV endocardial pacing may offer benefit over conventional CRT in ischemic patients.MethodsWe performed cardiac magnetic resonance, invasive electroanatomic mapping (EAM), and measured the acute hemodynamic response (AHR) in patients with existing CRT systems.ResultsIn all, 135 epicardial and endocardial pacing sites were tested in 8 patients. Endocardial pacing was superior to epicardial pacing with respect to mean AHR (% change in dP/dtmax vs. baseline) (11.81 [-7.2 to 44.6] vs. 6.55 [-11.0 to 19.7]; p = 0.025). This was associated with a similar first ventricular depolarization (Q-LV) (75 ms [13 to 161 ms] vs. 75 ms [25 to 129 ms]; p = 0.354), shorter stimulation–QRS duration (15 ms [7 to 43 ms] vs. 19 ms [5 to 66 ms]; p = 0.010) and shorter paced QRS duration (149 ms [95 to 218 ms] vs. 171 ms [120 to 235 ms]; p < 0.001). The mean best achievable AHR was higher with endocardial pacing (25.64 ± 14.74% vs. 12.64 ± 6.76%; p = 0.044). Furthermore, AHR was significantly greater pacing the same site endocardially versus epicardially (15.2 ± 10.7% vs. 7.6 ± 6.3%; p = 0.014) with a shorter paced QRS duration (137 ± 22 ms vs. 166 ± 30 ms; p < 0.001) despite a similar Q-LV (70 ± 38 ms vs. 79 ± 34 ms; p = 0.512). Lack of capture due to areas of scar (corroborated by EAM and cardiac magnetic resonance) was associated with a poor AHR.ConclusionsIn ischemic patients with poor CRT response, biventricular endocardial pacing is superior to epicardial pacing. This may reflect accessibility to sites that cannot be reached via coronary sinus anatomy and/or by access to more rapidly conducting tissue. Furthermore, guidance to the optimal LV pacing site may be aided by modalities such as cardiac magnetic resonance to target delayed activating sites while avoiding scar.

No abstract

Background: The mechanisms that initiate and sustain persistent atrial fibrillation are not well characterized. Ablation results remain significantly worse than in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in which the mechanism is better understood and subsequent targeted therapy has been developed. The aim of this study was to characterize and quantify patterns of activation during atrial fibrillation using contact mapping. Methods: Patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (n=14; mean age, 61±8 years; ejection fraction, 59±10%) underwent simultaneous biatrial contact mapping with 64 electrode catheters. The atrial electrograms were transformed into phase, and subsequent spatiotemporal mapping was performed to identify phase singularities (PSs). RESULTS: PSs were located in both atria, but we observed more PSs in the left atrium compared with the right atrium (779±302, 552±235; P =0.015). Although some PSs of duration sufficient to complete >1 rotation were detected, the maximum PS duration was only 1150 ms, and the vast majority (97%) of PSs persisted for too short a period to complete a full rotation. Although in selected patients there was evidence of PS local clustering, overall, PSs were distributed globally throughout both chambers with no clear anatomic predisposition. In a subset of patients (n=7), analysis was repeated using an alternative established atrial PS mapping technique, which confirmed our initial findings. Conclusions: No sustained rotors or localized drivers were detected, and instead, the mechanism of arrhythmia maintenance was consistent with the multiple wavelet hypothesis, with passive activation of short-lived rotational activity. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01765075.