2017
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-59448-4_23
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimation of Local Conduction Velocity from Myocardium Activation Time: Application to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Since ground truth intramural activation times are commonly not available from in-vivo interventions, this work relies on a synthetic dataset generated by a fast graph-based electrophysiological model (Pheiffer et al, 2017 ). The physiological priors of the cardiac anatomy are expected to be known.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Since ground truth intramural activation times are commonly not available from in-vivo interventions, this work relies on a synthetic dataset generated by a fast graph-based electrophysiological model (Pheiffer et al, 2017 ). The physiological priors of the cardiac anatomy are expected to be known.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To this end, we require a personalization scheme that finds the best set of edge weights that explains the data, i.e., the sparse electroanatomical map as well as the routinely acquired 12-lead ECG. This work leverages the approach proposed by Pheiffer et al ( 2017 ). The first step comprises a global optimization of homogeneous tissue conduction velocities.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The possibility of integrating this source of information with activation time data would improve the accuracy of conduction velocity estimates, as well as the integration of additional data on the position and the shape of the mapping catheter (see e.g., Verma et al, 2018 ). We remark that our model parameterization, presented in the next section, can take advantage of any conduction velocity estimation technique, starting from the most adopted ones reviewed in Cantwell et al ( 2015 ), up to new techniques, such as the streamline-based method of Good et al ( 2020 ), the two-stage technique based on the depolarization pattern reconstruction shown in Nagel et al ( 2019 ), the back-propagation parameter estimation procedure proposed in Pheiffer et al ( 2017 ), or physics-informed neural networks applied to cardiac activation mapping in Sahli Costabal et al ( 2020 ).…”
Section: Estimation Of the Conduction Velocitymentioning
confidence: 99%