- 作者列表："Isasi I","Irusta U","Aramendi E","H Idris A","Sörnmo L
OBJECTIVE:An artefact-free electrocardiogram (ECG) is essential during cardiac arrest to decide therapy such as defibrillation. Mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) devices cause movement artefacts that alter the ECG. This study analyzes the efectiveness of mechanical CPR artefact suppression filters to restore clinically relevant ECG information. APPROACH:In total, 495 10-s ECGs were used, of which 165 were in ventricular fibrillation (VF), 165 in organized rhythms (OR) and 165 contained mechanical CPR artefacts recorded during asystole. CPR artefacts and rhythms were mixed at controlled signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), ranging from -20 dB to 10 dB. Mechanical artefacts were removed using least mean squares (LMS), recursive least squares (RLS) and Kalman filters. Performance was evaluated by comparing the clean and the restored ECGs in terms of restored SNR, correlation-based similarity measures, and clinically relevant features: QRS detection performance for OR, and dominant frequency, mean amplitude and waveform irregularity for VF. For each filter, a shock/no-shock support vector machine algorithm based on multiresolution analysis of the restored ECG was designed, and evaluated in terms of sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp). MAIN RESULTS:The RLS filter produced the largest correlation coefficient (0.80), the largest average increase in SNR (9.5 dB), and the best QRS detection performance. The LMS filter best restored VF with errors of 10.3% in dominant frequency, 18.1% in amplitude and 11.8% in waveform irregularity. The Se/Sp of the diagnosis of the restored ECG were 95.1/94.5% using the RLS filter and 97.0/91.4% using the LMS filter. SIGNIFICANCE:Suitable filter configurations to restore ECG waveforms during mechanical CPR have been determined, allowing reliable clinical decisions without interrupting mechanical CPR therapy.
目的: 在心脏骤停时，无人工制品心电图 (ECG) 是决定除颤等治疗的必要条件。机械心肺复苏 (CPR) 设备引起运动伪影，改变心电图。本研究分析了机械 CPR 伪影抑制滤波器恢复临床相关心电图信息的有效性。 途径: 共使用 10-s 心电图 495 例，其中 165 例在室颤 (VF)，165 例在有组织节律 (OR) 165 包含停搏期间记录的机械 CPR 伪影。在控制信噪比 (SNRs) 下混合 CPR 伪影和节律，范围为-20 dB 至 10 dB。使用最小均方 (LMS) 、递归最小二乘 (RLS) 和卡尔曼滤波器去除机械伪影。通过比较恢复的 SNR 、基于相关性的相似性度量和临床相关特征的清洁和恢复的 ecg 来评估性能: OR 的 QRS 检测性能和主导频率,VF 的平均振幅和波形不规则性。针对每个滤波器，设计了基于恢复心电图多分辨率分析的休克/无休克支持向量机算法，并从灵敏度 (Se) 和特异性 (Sp) 方面进行了评价。 主要结果: RLS 滤波器产生了最大的相关系数 (0.80)，最大的信噪比平均增加 (9.5 dB)，QRS 检测性能最好。LMS 滤波器最好地恢复了 VF，主频误差为 10.3%，振幅误差为 18.1%，波形不规则误差为 11.8%。使用 RLS 滤波器诊断恢复心电图的 Se/Sp 为 95.1/94.5%，使用 LMS 滤波器为 97.0/91.4%。 意义: 已经确定了在机械 CPR 期间恢复 ECG 波形的合适滤波器配置，允许可靠的临床决策而不中断机械 CPR 治疗。
METHODS:AIMS:Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using ablation index (AI) incorporates stability, contact force (CF), time, and power. The CLOSE protocol combines AI and ≤6 mm interlesion distance. Safety concerns are raised about surround flow ablation catheters (STSF). To compare safety and effectiveness of an atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation strategy using AI vs. CLOSE protocol using STSF.,METHODS AND RESULTS:First cluster was treated using AI and second cluster using CLOSE. Procedural data, safety, and recurrence of any atrial tachycardia (AT) or AF >30 s were collected prospectively. All Classes 1c and III anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD) were stopped after the blanking period. In total, all 215 consecutive patients [AI: 121 (paroxysmal: n = 97), CLOSE: n = 94 (paroxysmal: n = 74)] were included. Pulmonary vein isolation was reached in all in similar procedure duration (CLOSE: 107 ± 25 vs. AI: 102 ± 24 min; P = 0.1) and similar radiofrequency time (CLOSE: 36 ± 11 vs. AI: 37 ± 8 min; P = 0.4) but first pass isolation was higher in CLOSE vs. AI [left veins: 90% vs. 80%; P < 0.05 and right veins: 84% vs. 73%; P < 0.05]. Twelve-month off-AAD freedom of AF/AT was higher in CLOSE vs. AI [79% (paroxysmal: 85%) vs. 64% (paroxysmal: 68%); P < 0.05]. Only four patients (2%) without recurrence were on AAD during follow-up. Major complications were similar (CLOSE: 2.1% vs. AI: 2.5%; P = 0.87).,CONCLUSION:The CLOSE protocol is more effective than a PVI approach solely using AI, especially in paroxysmal AF. In this off-AAD study, 79% of patients were free from AF/AT during 12-month follow-up. The STSF catheter appears to be safe using conventional CLOSE targets.
METHODS:OBJECTIVE:To investigate the role of driver mechanism and the effect of electrogram dispersion-guided driver mapping and ablation in atrial fibrillation (AF) at different stages of progression.,METHODS:A total of 256 consecutive patients with AF who had undergone pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus driver ablation or conventional ablation were divided into three groups: paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF; group A, n = 51); persistent atrial fibrillation (PsAF; group B, n = 38); and long standing-persistent atrial fibrillation (LS-PsAF; group C, n = 39). PVI was performed with the guidance of the ablation index. The electrogram dispersion was analyzed for driver mapping.,RESULTS:The most prominent driver regions were at roof (28.0%), posterior wall (17.6%), and bottom (21.3%). From patients with PAF to those with PsAF and LS-PsAF: the complexity of extra-pulmonary vein (PV) drivers including distribution, mean number, and area of dispersion region increased (P < .001). Patients who underwent driver ablation vs conventional ablation had higher procedural AF termination rate (76.6% vs 28.1%; P < .001). With AF progression, the termination rate gradually decreased from group A to group C, and the role of PVI in AF termination was also gradually weakened from group A to group C (39.6%, 7.4%, and 4.3%; P < .001) in patients with driver ablation. At the end of the follow-up, the rate of sinus rhythm maintenance was higher in patients with driver ablation than those with conventional ablation (89.1% vs 70.3%; P < .001).,CONCLUSION:The formation of extra-PV drivers provides an important mechanism for AF maintenance with their complexity increasing with AF progression. Electrogram dispersion-guided driver ablation appears to be an efficient adjunctive approach to PVI for AF treatment.
METHODS:PURPOSE:Whether or not pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) plus left atrial posterior wall isolation (PWI) using contact force (CF) sensing improves the ablation outcome for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. This study compared the outcome of PVI plus PWI and additional non-PV trigger ablation for persistent AF with/without CF sensing. METHODS:This retrospective cohort study analyzed 148 propensity score-matched persistent AF patients (median duration of persistent AF, 8 months (interquartile range, 3-24 months); left atrial diameter, 43 ± 7 mm) undergoing PVI plus PWI and ablation of non-PV triggers provoked by high-dose isoproterenol, including 74 with CF-sensing catheters (CF group) and 74 with conventional catheters (non-CF group). PVI plus PWI with no additional ablation but cavotricuspid isthmus ablation was performed without non-PV triggers in 48 CF patients (65%) and 54 non-CF patients (73%) (P = 0.38). In all other patients, we performed additional ablation of provoked non-PV triggers. RESULTS:The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the rate of freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence of antiarrhythmic drugs at 12 months after the single procedure was higher in the CF group than in the non-CF group (85 vs. 70%, log-rank P = 0.030). A multivariable analysis revealed that using CF sensing and non-inducibility of AF from a non-PV trigger after PVI and PWI were significantly associated with a reduced rate of atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence. CONCLUSIONS:Compared with non-CF sensing, PVI plus PWI and additional non-PV trigger ablation using CF-sensing catheters for persistent AF can reduce the rate of atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence.