Electrocardiographic imaging (ECGI): What is the minimal number of leads needed to obtain a good spatial resolution?

Abstract

AimsAssess the minimal number of ECGI leads needed to obtain a good spatial resolution. MethodsWe enrolled 20 patients that underwent ablation of premature ventricular or atrial contractions using Carto and ECGI with AMYCARD. We evaluated the agreement regarding the site of origin of the arrhythmia between the ECGI and Carto, the area and diameter of the earliest activation site obtained with the ECGI (EASa and EASd). Based on previous studies with pacemapping, we considered a good spatial resolution of the ECGI when the EASd measured on the isopotential map was less than 18 mm. In presence of agreement the ECGI was reprocessed: a) with half the number of electrode bands (8 leads per electrode band) and b) with 6 electrode bands. ResultsThe initial map was obtained with 23 (22-23) electrode bands per patient, corresponding to 143 (130-170) leads. Agreement rate was 85%, the median EASa and EASd were: 0.7 (0.5-1.3) cm2 and 9 (8-13) mm. With half the number of electrode bands including 73 (60-79) leads, agreement rate was 80%, the EASa and EASd were: 2.1 (1.5-6.2) cm2 and 16 (14 -28) mm. With only six electrode bands using 38 (30-42) leads, agreement rate was 55%, EASa and EASd were: 4.0 (3.3-5.0) cm2 and 23 (21-25) mm.The number of leads was a predictor of agreement with a good spatial resolution, OR (95% CI) of 1.138 (1.050–1.234), p = .002. According to the ROC curve, the minimal number of leads was 74 (AUC 0.981; 95% CI: 0.949–1.00, p < .0001). ConclusionReducing the number of leads was associated with a lower agreement rate and a significant reduction of spatial resolution. However, the number of leads needed to achieve a good spatial resolution was less than the maximal available.