Orthogonal bipolar approach to detect cardiac repolarization changes related to activation direction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background In addition to wave propagation, tissue anisotropy is thought to determine repolarization (repol). This may explain PVC-induced vulnerability to re-entry, based on change of activation setting up arrhythmogenic repol gradients. However, differential repolarization effects produced by waves propagating in various directions has not been studied. Though this effect could be measured with optical mapping it is unknown whether egm-based methods can detect these differences. Purpose The objective of this study was to determine the effect of wave direction on cardiac repol as measured by optical mapping. We recently proposed a novel method of assessing repol with the use of equi-spaced array catheters that allow integration of orthogonal bipolar egms and we sought to compare the performance of unipolar-based ARI methods and orthogonal bipolar egms in detecting the changes shown in optical mapping. Methods Simultaneous optical mapping and epicardial mapping with equi-spaced array catheters (Optrell and HD Grid) was performed in 6 rabbit Langendorff experiments. Unipolar egms from 4 electrodes forming a square in the middle of the array were recorded. A compound egm, called rEGM was created from orthogonal bipolar egms derived from the unipolar egms. Optical mapping was performed with a sampling rate of 3333 frames/s. Epicardial waves propagating in different directions were produced by point stimulation (CL = 200ms) at various location respective to the electrode array: Left (anterior LV, Pace B), right (lateral LV, Pace A), catheter distal (apex, Pace D) and catheter proximal (anterior base, Pace C). An endocardial source located transmurally across the electrode array was also evaluated. APD80 from optical data was measured from an algorithm described before. An APD estimate from rEGM, APDc was measured from the onset of QRS to baseline return of rEGM. For each method (optical, APDc and ARI) a statistical analysis evaluating the effect of wave propagation was performed. Results a) Gold Standard, optical mapping: Left column on figure shows the APD80 measurements respective to wave direction for two of the experiments. Kruskal-Wallis analysis showed a significant effect of wave direction on APD80 (p < 0.01 for both experiments 3 & 4). Multiple comparisons showed most notable effect from Pace A (lateral side). b) APDc shown in middle column successfully detected the changes (p < 0.01). c) Unipolar ARI: Right column shows the ARI measurements from the same experiments that failed to detect a directional repolarization difference (Exp3 p=0.10; Exp4 p =0.62). Conclusions Changes in direction of wave front propagation can change repol timing of as much as 30msec. These changes were not detectable by ARI method. However subtle changes of repolarization were successfully detected by orthogonal bipolar approach using equi-spaced array catheters, enabling a reliable method to assess minute repolarization changes locally.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".