@misc{cogprints4324, volume = {2}, number = {1}, month = {January}, author = {Anoop Kumar Gupta and Alok Maheshwari and Ranjan Thakur and Yash Y. Lokhandwala}, editor = {Balbir Singh and Yash Lokhandwala and Johnson Francis and Anup Gupta}, title = {Cardiac Mapping: Utility or Futility? }, publisher = {Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Group}, year = {2002}, journal = {Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal}, pages = {20--32}, keywords = {Cardiac mapping}, url = {http://cogprints.org/4324/}, abstract = { Cardiac mapping is a broad term that covers several modes of mapping such as body surface,1 endocardial,2 and epicardial3 mapping. The recording and analysis of extracellular electrograms, reported as early as 1915, forms the basis for cardiac mapping.4 More commonly, cardiac mapping is performed with catheters that are introduced percutaneously into the heart chambers and sequentially record the endocardial electrograms with the purpose of correlating local electrogram to cardiac anatomy. These electrophysiological catheters are navigated and localized with the use of fluoroscopy. Nevertheless, the use of fluoroscopy for these purposes may be problematic for a number of reasons, including: 1) the inability to accurately associate intracardiac electrograms with their precise location within the heart; 2) the endocardial surface is invisible using fluoroscopy and the target sites can only be approximated by their relationship with nearby structures such as ribs, blood vessels, and the position of other catheters; 3) due to the limitations of two-dimensional fluoroscopy, navigation is not exact, time consuming, and requires multiple views to estimate the three-dimensional location of the catheter; 4) inability to accurately return the catheter precisely to a previously mapped site; and 5) exposure of the patient and medical team to radiation. } }