Electrocardiographic imaging to guide ablation of ventricular arrhythmias and agreement between two different systems

A recent study using an epicardial-only electrocardiographic imaging (ECGI), suggests that the agreement of ECGI activation mapping and that of the contact mapping for ventricular arrhythmias (VA) is poor. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic value of two endo-epicardial ECGI systems using different cardiac sources and the agreement between them.

We performed 69 ECGI procedures in 52 patients referred for ablation of VA at our center. One system based on the extracellular potentials was used in 26 patients, the other based on the equivalent double layer model in 9, and both in 17 patients. The first uses up to 224 leads and the second just the 12‑lead ECG. The localization of the VA was done using a segmental model of the ventricles. A perfect match (PM) was defined as a predicted location within the same anatomic segment, whereas a near match (NM) as a predicted location within the same segment or a contiguous one.

44 patients underwent ablation, corresponding to 58 ECGI procedures (37 with the first and 21 with the second system). The percentage of PMs and NMs was not significantly different between the two systems, respectively 76% and 95%, p = 0.077, and 97% and 100%, p = 1.000. In 14 patients that underwent ablation and had the ECGI performed with both systems, raw agreement for PMs was 79%, p = 0.250 for disagreement.

ECGI systems were useful to identify the origin of the VAs, and the results were reproducible regardless the cardiac source.