Indian pacing and electrophysiology journal · 2016
Electrophysiological abnormalities in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in the absence of overt structural heart disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Arroja José David, Burri Haran, Park Chan Il, Giraudet Philippe, Zimmermann Marc
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to define the atrial electrical substrate in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) occurring in the absence of overt structural heart disease and to assess if electrophysiological parameters could predict AF recurrence after radiofrequency ablation in this population.
METHODS AND RESULTS: 45 consecutive patients (39 male, age 59 ± 10 years) with paroxysmal AF and without overt structural heart disease, referred for radiofrequency catheter ablation, were prospectively enrolled. A cohort of 12 age-matched patients without a history of AF, served as a control group. Atrial electrical substrate was assessed by P-wave signal-averaging, intracardiac conduction delays and refractory periods. Total P wave duration during signal-averaging was longer in patients with paroxysmal AF than in controls (140 ± 19 ms vs 123 ± 13 ms, p = 0.004). Patients with paroxysmal AF showed an increase in right intra-atrial (40.2 ± 11.3 ms vs 31.7 ± 11.8 ms, p = 0.02) and inter-atrial conduction delays (87.93 ± 22.0 ms vs 65.3 ± 15.6 ms, p = 0.001) in sinus rhythm. Refractory periods in the right atrium were longer in patients with paroxysmal AF (265 ± 44 ms vs 222 ± 32 ms, p = 0.002). After ablation, 22 patients had AF recurrence but showed no differences in electrophysiological parameters compared to patients without recurrence.
CONCLUSION: Electrophysiological abnormalities are present in patients with paroxysmal AF without overt structural heart disease. Neither signal-averaged P-wave duration nor intracardiac atrial electrophysiology could predict arrhythmia recurrence after pulmonary vein isolation.
METHODS AND RESULTS: 45 consecutive patients (39 male, age 59 ± 10 years) with paroxysmal AF and without overt structural heart disease, referred for radiofrequency catheter ablation, were prospectively enrolled. A cohort of 12 age-matched patients without a history of AF, served as a control group. Atrial electrical substrate was assessed by P-wave signal-averaging, intracardiac conduction delays and refractory periods. Total P wave duration during signal-averaging was longer in patients with paroxysmal AF than in controls (140 ± 19 ms vs 123 ± 13 ms, p = 0.004). Patients with paroxysmal AF showed an increase in right intra-atrial (40.2 ± 11.3 ms vs 31.7 ± 11.8 ms, p = 0.02) and inter-atrial conduction delays (87.93 ± 22.0 ms vs 65.3 ± 15.6 ms, p = 0.001) in sinus rhythm. Refractory periods in the right atrium were longer in patients with paroxysmal AF (265 ± 44 ms vs 222 ± 32 ms, p = 0.002). After ablation, 22 patients had AF recurrence but showed no differences in electrophysiological parameters compared to patients without recurrence.
CONCLUSION: Electrophysiological abnormalities are present in patients with paroxysmal AF without overt structural heart disease. Neither signal-averaged P-wave duration nor intracardiac atrial electrophysiology could predict arrhythmia recurrence after pulmonary vein isolation.