Towards Reduced Order Modelling of Cardiac Electroanatomical Mapping

Olivier Crabbe1, Karim El Houari2, Louis Rigal3, Sophie Collin4, Pierre L'Eplattenier5, Christelle Grivot5, Michel Rochette5, Antoine Simon6, Pascal Haigron7, Raphael Martins8
1University of Rennes, France (LTSI), 2Ansys, 3Univ Rennes, CHU Rennes, CLCC Eugène Marquis, Inserm, LTSI – UMR 1099, 4Ansys Inc, 5Ansys Inc., 6LTSI, Univ. Rennes 1, 7Université de Rennes, Inserm, 8Univ Rennes, CHU Rennes, LTSI Inserm U1099


Abstract

Context : Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a lethal heart rhythm disorder responsible for 80\% of sudden cardiac deaths. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of VT is minimally invasive and potentially curative but target identification using cardiac electroanatomical mapping (EAM) is challenging. Personalized computer heart models are a promising tool that may provide deeper insight of patient electrophysiology (EP). Personalization can be achieved by adjusting models to match measured ECGs or EAMs, a viable option for determining patient tissue properties. However, this approach requires short simulation times, that state-of-the-art reaction-diffusion models do not offer.

Aims : This study aimed to assess the accuracy of fast cardiac EP reduced order models (ROMs) built through machine-learning (ML) of computer simulation data.

Methods : Simulations were run on a left-ventricle reaction-diffusion EP model constructed with a single patient dataset from the CHU Rennes, France. The model contained anatomical features such as infarct scar, scar boundary zone, Purkinje network, transmural heterogeneity and general orthotropy. A batch of 150 simulations was run with varying orthotropy and myocardium conduction parameters. Resulting data was reduced through singular value decomposition then interpolated to obtain a 2-parameter-ROM that estimated endocardial activation maps for given orthotropy and conduction parameters.

Results : Simulation results were compared to patient endocardial EAMs in sinus rhythm, with a mean error of 28 ms. Mean ROM error with respect to simulated validation data was 0.09 ms using as low as 15 learning scenarios. Error was below 1 ms in at least 97% of non-scar endocardium nodes for all ROM estimations.

Conclusion : Although our computer model must be improved to better match patient EAMs, our ML algorithm can handle the anatomical features present in the simulations and yield fast and accurate 2-parameter-ROMs with limited learning data. Larger parameter sets will be explored to extend personalization possibilities.