• Something wrong with this record ?

Intracardiac echo-guided image integration: optimizing strategies for registration

TS Fahmy, H Mlcochova, OM Wazni, D Patel, R Cihak, M Kanj, S Beheiry, JD Burkhardt, T Dresing, S Hao, P Tchou, J Kautzner, RA Schweikert, M Arruda, W Saliba, A Natale

. 2007 ; 18 (3) : 276-282.

Language English Country United States

Document type Evaluation Study

Grant support
NR7912 MZ0 CEP Register

Digital library NLK
Full text - Část
Source

E-resources Online Full text

NLK CINAHL Plus with Full Text (EBSCOhost) from 1990-02-01 to 1 year ago
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost) from 1990-02-01 to 1 year ago
Wiley Online Library (archiv) from 1997-01-01 to 2012-12-31

INTRODUCTION: Image integration is being used in ablation procedures. However, the success of this approach is dependent on the accuracy of the image integration process. This study aims to evaluate the in vivo accuracy and reliability of the integrated image. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four patients undergoing radiofrequency (RF) ablation catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) were recruited for this study from three different centers. Cardiac computerized tomography (CT) was performed in all patients and a 3D image of the left atrium (LA) and pulmonary veins (PVs) was extracted for registration after segmentation using a software program (CartoMerge, Biosense Webster, Inc.). Different landmarks were selected for registration and compared. Surface registration was then done and the impact on integration and the landmarks was evaluated. The best landmark registration was achieved when the posterior points on the pulmonary veins were selected (5.6 +/- 3.2). Landmarks taken on the anterior wall, left atrial appendage (LAA) or the coronary sinus (CS) resulted in a larger registration error (9.1 +/- 2.5). The mean error for surface registration was 2.17 +/- 1.65. However, surface registration resulted in shifting of the initially registered landmark points leading to a larger error (from 5.6 +/- 3.2 to 9.2 +/- 2.1; 95% CI 4.2-3.05). CONCLUSION: Posterior wall landmarks at the PV-LA junction are the most accurate landmarks for image integration in respect to the target ablation area. The concurrent use of the present surface registration algorithm may result in shifting of the initial landmarks with loss of their initial correlation with the area of interest.

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc13026909
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20190104104833.0
007      
ta
008      
130816s2007 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
035    __
$a (PubMed)17284265
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Fahmy, Tamer S. $u Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA.
245    10
$a Intracardiac echo-guided image integration: optimizing strategies for registration / $c TS Fahmy, H Mlcochova, OM Wazni, D Patel, R Cihak, M Kanj, S Beheiry, JD Burkhardt, T Dresing, S Hao, P Tchou, J Kautzner, RA Schweikert, M Arruda, W Saliba, A Natale
520    9_
$a INTRODUCTION: Image integration is being used in ablation procedures. However, the success of this approach is dependent on the accuracy of the image integration process. This study aims to evaluate the in vivo accuracy and reliability of the integrated image. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four patients undergoing radiofrequency (RF) ablation catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) were recruited for this study from three different centers. Cardiac computerized tomography (CT) was performed in all patients and a 3D image of the left atrium (LA) and pulmonary veins (PVs) was extracted for registration after segmentation using a software program (CartoMerge, Biosense Webster, Inc.). Different landmarks were selected for registration and compared. Surface registration was then done and the impact on integration and the landmarks was evaluated. The best landmark registration was achieved when the posterior points on the pulmonary veins were selected (5.6 +/- 3.2). Landmarks taken on the anterior wall, left atrial appendage (LAA) or the coronary sinus (CS) resulted in a larger registration error (9.1 +/- 2.5). The mean error for surface registration was 2.17 +/- 1.65. However, surface registration resulted in shifting of the initially registered landmark points leading to a larger error (from 5.6 +/- 3.2 to 9.2 +/- 2.1; 95% CI 4.2-3.05). CONCLUSION: Posterior wall landmarks at the PV-LA junction are the most accurate landmarks for image integration in respect to the target ablation area. The concurrent use of the present surface registration algorithm may result in shifting of the initial landmarks with loss of their initial correlation with the area of interest.
590    __
$a bohemika - dle Pubmed
650    12
$a fibrilace síní $x diagnóza $x chirurgie $7 D001281
650    12
$a katetrizační ablace $x metody $7 D017115
650    12
$a echokardiografie $x metody $7 D004452
650    02
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    02
$a srdeční síně $x radiografie $7 D006325
650    02
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    02
$a interpretace obrazu počítačem $x metody $x přístrojové vybavení $7 D007090
650    02
$a zobrazování trojrozměrné $x metody $x přístrojové vybavení $7 D021621
650    02
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    02
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    02
$a venae pulmonales $x radiografie $7 D011667
650    02
$a reprodukovatelnost výsledků $7 D015203
650    02
$a počítačová rentgenová tomografie $x metody $7 D014057
655    _2
$a hodnotící studie $7 D023362
700    1_
$a Mlčochová, Hanka $7 xx0119056
700    1_
$a Wazni, Oussama M.
700    1_
$a Patel, Dimpi
700    1_
$a Čihák, Robert $7 xx0061374
700    1_
$a Kanj, Mohamed
700    1_
$a Beheiry, Salwa
700    1_
$a Burkhard, J. David
700    1_
$a Dresing, Thomas
700    1_
$a Hao, Steven
700    1_
$a Tchou, Patrick
700    1_
$a Kautzner, Josef, $d 1957- $7 xx0037112
700    1_
$a Schweikert, Robert A.
700    1_
$a Arruda, Mauricio $7 gn_A_00008906
700    1_
$a Saliba, Walid
700    1_
$a Natale, Andrea $7 xx0230313
773    0_
$t Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology $g Roč. 18, č. 3 (2007), s. 276-282 $p J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol $x 1045-3873 $w MED00002569
910    __
$a ABA008 $b B 1866 $y 3 $z 0
990    __
$a 20130816142922 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20190104105028 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 990787 $s 825332
BAS    __
$a 3
BMC    __
$x MED00002569 $i 1045-3873 $a 2007 $b 18 $c 3 $d 276-282 $m Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology $n J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
GRA    __
$a NR7912 $p MZ0
LZP    __
$a NLK 2013-08/lpbo

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...