Why the study?
Does atrial tachycardia-induced remodeling versus heart failure-induced remodeling differentially affect atrial dimensions, emptying function, and AF promotion in canine models?
Does atrial tachycardia-induced remodeling versus heart failure-induced remodeling differentially affect atrial dimensions, emptying function, and AF promotion in canine models?
Structural remodeling (atrial size and contraction) is the primary driver of AF promotion in heart failure models, whereas electrophysiological remodeling is more important in atrial tachycardia-induced models.
Differential atrial remodeling in canine ATR versus HF models suggests distinct AF mechanisms; leaves open translation to human subtypes.
OBJECTIVES: Atrial tachycardia-induced remodeling (ATR) and ventricular tachypacing-induced heart failure (HF) create experimental substrates for atrial fibrillation (AF), and both have been reported to produce atrial dilation and hypocontractility. The relative importance of changes in atrial size and contractility in the two models is unknown. This study compared changes in atrial dimensions and emptying in ATR versus HF dog models and related them to AF promotion. METHODS: In ATR dogs (n=11), the right atrium (RA) was paced at 400/min for 42 days. In HF dogs (n=10), the right ventricle was paced at 240 bpm for 2 weeks, followed by 3 weeks at 220 bpm. Transthoracic echocardiography was performed at baseline and weekly thereafter. At a terminal electrophysiological study, RA effective refractory period (ERP) was recorded and AF induced repeatedly by atrial burst pacing to measure mean AF duration (DAF). RESULTS: Left atrial (LA) systolic area increased by 10.0% in ATR versus 48.2% in HF dogs (P=0.008), with significant time-dependent changes in HF (P=0.0001), but not ATR (P=0.16). LA diastolic area increased over time in both groups (P=0.004, 0.0001 for ATR and HF respectively), but increases were much larger in CHF (80.2%) compared to ATR (24.2%, P=0.0002). Similar findings were obtained for RA. Fractional area shortening (FAS) decreased by 19.4% (ATR) versus 41.8% (HF, P=0.007) in LA and 13.7% (ATR) versus 33.7% (HF, P=0.03) in RA. RA ERP correlated with DAF in ATR dogs (r=-0.79, P<0.001), but not in HF dogs (r=0.20, P=NS). DAF and diastolic areas of RA and LA were highly correlated (r=0.71, 0.77; P<0.01 for each) in HF dogs, but not in ATR dogs (r=-0.18, 0.29; P=NS). CONCLUSIONS: Remodeling of atrial size and emptying function is much greater in HF than in ATR. Whereas in ATR, electrophysiological remodeling is of prime importance in AF promotion, structural remodeling (as reflected in changes in atrial size and contraction) appears much more important in HF-induced AF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yue Shi (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: