Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 15, 2025

Estimating Bilateral Atrial Function by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Feature Tracking in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: July 20, 2022
Performance of atrial conduction velocity algorithms with error-prone clinical measurements for the identification of
Ali Gharaviri1, Vinush Vigneswaran2, Keeran Vickneson2
1Centre for Cardiovascular Science, The University of Edinburgh, UK; Heart Rhythm Research Brussels, Postgraduate Program in Cardiac Electrophysiology and Pacing, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium; Heart Rhythm Management Centre, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Brussels, Belgium; Department of Electronics and Informatics (ETRO), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), 1050 Brussels, Belgium.
Introduction:
Measuring conduction velocity, as a direct consequence of fibrosis, may provide a better method to localise fibrotic regions. This study aims to assess established cardiac conduction velocity calculation methods (Triangulation, Polynomial Surface Fitting, and Radial Basis Function) in identifying areas of conduction slowing caused by fibrosis, considering realistic measurement errors.
Method:
Using a human left atrium computational model, atrial activation was simulated. Each conduction velocity calculation method's performance was evaluated under uncertainties in mapping point density, local activation time assignment and electrode locations by comparing calculated conduction velocity to ground truth conduction velocity derived from high-resolution simulated atrial activation.
Results:
All methods agreed well with ground truth conduction velocity maps in noise-free, high-density sampling conditions. However, Triangulation and Polynomial Surface Fitting methods showed susceptibility to noise, exhibiting significant errors under moderate to high noise levels. Radial Basis Function method demonstrated greater robustness to noise and reduced sampling density. Fibrotic region identification accuracy was high under ideal conditions for all methods but declined with increasing noise, with the Radial Basis Function method maintaining superior performance.
Conclusion:
While all methods accurately estimate conduction velocity under ideal conditions, the Radial Basis Function method shows robustness to a realistic clinical noise, hence making it the most suitable to identify fibrotic regions.

