PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
November 1, 1976Circulation193 citationsOpen Access

Electrophysiologic properties and response to pharmacologic agents of fibers from diseased human atria.

View Full Paper
AHAllan J. HordofRERichard N. EdieJMJames R. Malm

Key Result

Moderately to markedly dilated human atria exhibited slow response action potentials and longer P wave duration (111 vs 89 msec, P<0.005) compared to normal or slightly dilated atria.

Key Points

  • This study aims to investigate the electrophysiologic properties of human atrial fibers and their responses to pharmacologic agents during cardiac surgery.
  • Standard microelectrode techniques recorded action potentials from human right atrial fibers during cardiac surgery.
  • Fibers were classified into two groups based on maximum diastolic potential and arrhythmia presence.
  • Pharmacologic agents including verapamil and procainamide were administered to assess their effects.
  • Group A (10 patients) had an MDP of -71.4 mV with fast action potentials, while group B (12 patients) had an MDP of 50.3 mV with slow action potentials.
  • Atrial arrhythmias occurred in 4 patients from group B, while no arrhythmias were observed in group A.
  • Verapamil significantly depressed the action potential plateau in group A, while procainamide had limited effects at lower doses with no impact on slow response automaticity.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=22)

Structured PICO

How do the electrophysiologic properties and responses to verapamil and procainamide differ between normal and diseased human atrial fibers?

P
Population
Human right atrial fibers obtained during cardiac surgery from 22 patients (Group A: n=10, normal or slightly dilated atria; Group B: n=12, moderately to markedly dilated atria).
I
Intervention
Verapamil (0.1-1 mg/L) and Procainamide (1-100 mg/L)
C
Comparator
Comparison between Group A (normal/slightly dilated) and Group B (moderately/markedly dilated) fibers
O
Outcome
Action potential characteristics (maximum diastolic potential, fast/slow responses) and response to pharmacologic agentssurrogate

Diseased human atrial fibers exhibit slow response action potentials and altered responses to antiarrhythmic agents compared to normal fibers, providing mechanistic insights into atrial arrhythmias.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 111% vs 89%

p-value: p=<0.005

Abstract

We used standard microelectrode techniques to record action potentials of human right atrial fibers obtained during cardiac surgery, and correlated these potentials with clinical and preoperative ECG data. Human atrial fibers were classified as follows: Group A (ten patients) had a maximum diastolic potential (MDP) of -71.4 +/- 5.1mV (mean +/- SD), and action potentials that were primarily fast responses. These atria were normal or slightly dilated. In group B (12 patients) MDP was 50.3 +/- 5.7 mV; action potentials were slow responses and the atria were moderately to markedly dilated. Atrial arrhythmias occurred in four group B and no group A patients. The ECG revealed a signficant difference (P less than 0.005) in P wave duration: group A, 89 +/- 3.0 msec; group B, 111 +/- 6.0 msec. Verapamil, 0.1 mg/L, markedly depressed only the action potential plateau of group A. Procainamide 1-100 mg/L had equivalent effects on fibers of both groups A and B, effects which were small at dosages of less than 40 mg/L. Procainamide did not depress slow response automaticity, but verapamil (0.1-1 mg/L) did.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hordof et al. (1976) conducted an observational in Diseased human atria (n=22). Verapamil and Procainamide (in vitro) vs. Normal or slightly dilated atria (Group A) was evaluated on P wave duration (p=<0.005). Moderately to markedly dilated human atria exhibited slow response action potentials and longer P wave duration (111 vs 89 msec, P<0.005) compared to normal or slightly dilated atria.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0eda5f218372ada647c743https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.54.5.774
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper