Abstract
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to evaluate an investigational catheter that incorporates 3 microelectrodes embedded along the circumference of a standard 3.5-mm open-irrigated catheter.
BACKGROUND
Mapping resolution is influenced by both electrode size and interelectrode spacing. Multielectrode mapping catheters enhance mapping resolution within scar compared with standard ablation catheters; however, this requires the use of 2 separate catheters for mapping and ablation.
METHODS
Six swine with healed infarction and 2 healthy controls underwent mapping of the left ventricle using a THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH SF catheter with 3 additional microelectrodes (0.167 mm2) along its circumference (Qdot,Biosense Webster, Diamond Bar, California). Mapping resolution in healthy and scarred tissue was compared between the standard electrodes and microelectrodes using electrogram characteristics, cardiac magnetic resonance, and histology.
RESULTS
In healthy myocardium, bipolar voltage amplitude was similar between the standard electrodes and microelectrodes, with a fifth percentile of 1.19 and 1.30 mV, respectively. In healed infarction, the area of low bipolar voltage (defined as <1.5 mV) was smaller with microelectrodes (16.8 cm2 vs. 25.3 cm2; p ¼ 0.033). Specifically, the microelectrodes detected zones of increased bipolar voltage amplitude, with normal electrogram characteristics occurring at the end of or after the QRS, consistent with channels of preserved subendocardium. Identification of surviving subendocardium by the microelectrodes was consistent with cardiac magnetic resonance and histology. The microelectrodes also improved distinction between near-field and far-field electrograms, with more precise identification of scar border zones.
CONCLUSIONS
This novel catheter combines high-resolution mapping and radiofrequency ablation with an open-irrigated, tissue contact–sensing technology. It improves scar mapping resolution while limiting the need for and cost associated with the use of a separate mapping catheter. (J Am Coll Cardiol EP 2017;3:220–31)