Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 13, 2026

Real-Time Cardiac Mapping with a Noninvasive Imageless Electrocardiographic Imaging System
Published on: April 11, 2025
Comparative study of methods for ventricular activity cancellation in atrial electrograms of atrial fibrillation
José Joaquín Rieta1, Fernando Hornero
1Biomedical Synergy, Valencia University of Technology, Campus de Gandia, 46730, Gandia, Spain. jjrieta@eln.upv.es
Insights
Independent Component Analysis (ICA) effectively removes ventricular activity from atrial electrograms, preserving waveform integrity. This method outperforms template matching and subtraction (TMS) and adaptive ventricular cancellation (AVC), especially in organized rhythms.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
- Signal Processing in Medicine
- Biomedical Engineering
Background:
- Atrial fibrillation is a prevalent cardiovascular disease.
- Accurate analysis of atrial electrograms (AEG) requires removing ventricular activity.
- Existing methods face limitations, especially when multi-lead recordings are unavailable.
Purpose of the Study:
- To introduce and evaluate a novel application of Independent Component Analysis (ICA) for ventricular activity removal from unipolar epicardial atrial electrograms.
- To compare the performance of ICA against Template Matching and Subtraction (TMS) and Adaptive Ventricular Cancellation (AVC).
- To assess method efficacy based on atrial rhythm regularity.
Main Methods:
- Independent Component Analysis (ICA) applied to unipolar epicardial AEGs using a single reference lead.
- Comparative analysis with Template Matching and Subtraction (TMS) and Adaptive Ventricular Cancellation (AVC).
- Evaluation using atrial waveform similarity (S) and ventricular depolarization reduction (VDR) metrics on a beat-by-beat basis across 20 patients.
Main Results:
- ICA demonstrated superior atrial waveform preservation (median S = 99.64%) compared to TMS (95.18%) and AVC (94.76%) in organized atrial rhythms.
- ICA achieved the best ventricular depolarization reduction (median VDR = 6.32 dB) versus TMS (4.98 dB) and AVC (4.12 dB) in organized rhythms.
- In disorganized rhythms, ICA (S = 98.22%) and TMS (S = 97.72%) showed comparable waveform preservation, outperforming AVC (S = 93.74%).
Conclusions:
- Independent Component Analysis (ICA) is a highly effective method for reducing ventricular activity from unipolar atrial electrograms, particularly in organized atrial arrhythmias.
- ICA offers superior atrial waveform preservation and ventricular signal reduction compared to TMS and AVC in organized rhythms.
- Both ICA and TMS provide comparable performance in waveform preservation during disorganized atrial arrhythmias.
Abstract:
Atrial fibrillation is a very common cardiovascular disease in clinical practice. One relevant issue to understand its pathophysiological mechanisms is the analysis and interpretation of atrial electrograms (AEG). To study these signals properly, ventricular activity has to be removed from the AEG. In this work, a new application of independent component analysis (ICA) to the AEG is presented, where ventricular activity is removed from atrial epicardial recordings making use of only one reference lead. Therefore the technique is suitable when multi-lead recordings are unavailable as in atrial implantable cardioverter defibrilators. In addition to the proposed new methodology this work also presents the first comparative study, making use of unipolar epicardial AEGs, among the ICA-based technique, template matching and subtraction (TMS), and adaptive ventricular cancellation (AVC) on a database of 20 patients. A performance comparative analysis was carried out by evaluating epicardial atrial waveform similarity (S) and ventricular depolarization reduction (VDR) as a function of atrial rhythm regularity on a beat-by-beat basis. Results indicate that, when the epicardial atrial rhythm is quite organized, ICA is able to preserve the atrial waveform very precisely and better than the other methods (median S = 99.64% +/- 0.31% in contrast to 95.18% +/- 2.71% for TMS and 94.76% +/- 4.12% for AVC). Moreover, ventricular reduction is the best for ICA (median VDR = 6.32 +/- 4.41 dB in contrast to 4.98 +/- 4.48 dB for TMS and 4.12 +/- 2.72 dB for AVC). On the other hand, when the atrial activity is disorganized, TMS notably improves performance (S = 97.72% +/- 1.87%), but ICA still is the best in waveform preservation (S = 98.22% +/- 1.53%) whereas AVC remains similar (S = 93.74% +/- 4.38%). In conclusion, ICA can be considered as notably the best approach to reduce ventricular activity from unipolar atrial electrograms in organized atrial arrhythmias. On the other hand, both TMS and ICA give quite similar results when the atrial arrhythmia is disorganized.
Related Concept Videos
ECG Interpretation of Arrhythmias II: Atrial, Junctional and Ventricular Arrhythmias
Disturbances in Heart Rhythm
Arrhythmias are categorized by their speed, rhythm, and origin. A slow heart...
Dysrhythmias IV: Characteristics of Bradyarrhythmias
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
Dysrhythmias V: Evaluating Dysrhythmias

