December 16, 2004HeartOpen Access

Acute improvement of atrial mechanical stunning after electrical cardioversion of persistent atrial fibrillation: comparison between biatrial and single atrial pacing

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Why the study?

Does biatrial pacing improve atrial mechanical stunning compared to single atrial pacing or sinus rhythm in patients after electrical cardioversion of persistent atrial fibrillation?

Structured PICO

Does biatrial pacing improve atrial mechanical stunning compared to single atrial pacing or sinus rhythm in patients after electrical cardioversion of persistent atrial fibrillation?

Population

20 patients with persistent atrial fibrillation

Intervention

Atrial pacing from the right atrial appendage, left lateral atrium, and both atria simultaneously (biatrial pacing) at 80 beats/min

Comparator

Sinus rhythm (no pacing) and single-site atrial pacing (right atrial appendage)

Outcome

Comparison of atrial mechanical function (spontaneous echo contrast, left atrial appendage emptying velocity, left atrial appendage emptying fraction, transmitral inflow velocity of the atrial wave) and maximum P wave duration in 12 lead ECGsurrogate

Biatrial pacing acutely improves atrial mechanical stunning more effectively than single-site pacing after electrical cardioversion of persistent atrial fibrillation.

Implication

Biatrial pacing may improve post-cardioversion atrial function; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the acute effects of atrial pacing at different pacing sites on mechanical stunning after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF). SETTING: Tertiary referral centre. PATIENTS: 20 patients with persistent AF were studied. INTERVENTIONS: Spontaneous echo contrast (SEC), left atrial appendage emptying velocity (LAAEV), and left atrial appendage emptying fraction (LAAEF) were assessed by transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) during AF, after conversion to sinus rhythm, and during atrial pacing from the right atrial appendage, left lateral atrium, and both atria simultaneously. Transmitral inflow velocity of the atrial wave (TMIF-A) by TOE and the maximum P wave duration in 12 lead ECG were also measured during sinus rhythm and atrial pacing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of atrial mechanical function and P wave duration in 12 lead ECG during atrial pacing from different sites after cardioversion of AF. RESULTS: Compared with sinus rhythm, atrial pacing at 80 beats/min increased LAAEV from mean (SD) 14.6 (10.1) to 33.4 (19.8) cm/s (p = 0.001), LAAEF from 13.8 (8.5) to 32.1 (11.2)% (p < 0.001), and TMIF-A from 24.6 (11.9) to 45.6 (21.0) cm/s (p < 0.001) and reduced SEC grade from 2.6 (1.0) to 1.6 (0.9) (p < 0.001). These effects had a positive force-frequency relation. Biatrial pacing produced the shortest P wave duration and resulted in the most significant improvement in atrial function (LAAEV, 33.2 (19.3) v 53.7 (23.9) cm/s, p = 0.0001; LAAEF, 31.9 (11.1) v 46.2 (12.6)%, p < 0.0001; TMIF-A, 37.7 (18.3) v 54.1 (21.2) cm/s, p < 0.001; SEC grade, 1.4 (1.1) v 0.8 (0.9), p = 0.001, right atrial appendage versus biatrial pacing). CONCLUSIONS: Atrial pacing at increased rates can improve atrial mechanical function after cardioversion of persistent AF. Biatrial pacing may be the most effective technique to reverse atrial mechanical stunning.