PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Deborah Nairn AU - Martin Eichenlaub AU - Björn Müller-Edenborn AU - Heiko Lehrmann AU - Claudia Nagel AU - Luca Azzolin AU - Giorgio Luongo AU - Rosa M. Figueras Ventura AU - Barbara Rubio Forcada AU - Anna Vallès Colomer AU - Thomas Arentz AU - Olaf Dössel AU - Axel Loewe AU - Amir Jadidi TI - LGE-MRI for diagnosis of left atrial cardiomyopathy as identified in high-definition endocardial voltage and conduction velocity mapping AID - 10.1101/2022.02.02.22269817 DP - 2022 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2022.02.02.22269817 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/04/2022.02.02.22269817.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/04/2022.02.02.22269817.full AB - Background Electro-anatomical voltage, conduction velocity (CV) mapping and late-gadolinium-enhancement-magnetic-resonance-imaging (LGE-MRI) are different diagnostic modalities for atrial cardiomyopathy (ACM). However, discordances remain in the location and extent of detected ACM.Objectives (1) Comparison of ACM extent and location between current modalities. (2) Development of new estimated optimised image-intensity-thresholds (EOIIT) for LGE-MRI identifying patients with ACM.Methods Thirty-six ablation-naive persistent AF patients underwent LGE-MRI and high-definition electro-anatomical mapping in sinus rhythm. Significant ACM was defined as low-voltage-substrate (LVS) extent≥5% of the left atrium (LA) surface at <0.5 mV. LGE areas were classified using the Utah, image-intensity-ratio (IIR>1.20) and new EOIIT method for comparison to LVS and slow-conductionareas <0.2 m/s. ROC-analysis determined the LGE-extent enabling accurate diagnosis of ACM.Results The degree and distribution of detected pathological substrate varied significantly (p<0.001) across the mapping modalities: 3% (IQR 0-12%) of the LA displayed LVS<0.5 mV vs. 14% (3-25%) slow-conduction-areas<0.2 m/s vs. 16% (6-32%) LGE with Utah method vs. 17%(11-24%) using IIR>1.20, with enhanced discrepancies on posterior LA. A linear correlation was found between the OIIT and each patient’s mean blood pool intensity (R2=0.89, p<0.001). LGE-MRI-based ACM-diagnosis improved with the novel EOIIT (83% sensitivity, 88% specificity, AUC:0.94) in comparison to the Utah method (60% sensitivity, 75% specificity, AUC:0.76), and IIR>1.20 (58% sensitivity, 75% specificity, AUC:0.71)Conclusion Important discordances in distribution of pathological substrate exist between LA-LVS, CV and LGE-MRI, irrespective of the LGE-detection protocol that is used. However, the new EOIIT method improves LGE-MRI-based ACM-diagnosis in ablation-naive AF-patients.Competing Interest StatementRF, BF and AC are employees of Adas 3D Medical. This investigator-initiated study was financially supported by Medtronic. Medtronic had no influence on collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in the writing of the report, and in the decision to submit the article for publication.Funding StatementWe gratefully acknowledge financial support by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) through DO637/22-3, by the Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst Baden-Württemberg through the Research Seed Capital (RiSC) program and by Medtronic.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:From February to July 2019, 41 consecutive patients with symptomatic persistent AF (lasting >7 days and <12 months) scheduled for their first PVI were prospectively included in this clinical trial (German WHO primary registry DRKS, unique identifier: DRKS00014687). The study was approved by the institutional ethics committee of the University of Freiburg (Germany) and all patients provided written informed consent prior to enrolment.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesTo protect the safety of the patients, the data used for this study can not be provided. However, the figures within the article and supplementary material show detailed analyses for all patients used. Requests to access these datasets should be directed to: Deborah Nairn, deborah.nairn@kit.edu.