Acute Effects of Different Atrial Pacing Sites in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Comparison of Single Site and Biatrial Pacing

It has been reported that a trial single site or biatrial pacing can suppress the occurrence of AF. However, its mechanism remains unclear. The study population included 32 patients with AF (n = 20: AF group), or without paroxysmal AF (n = 12: control group). The mechanism and efficacy of atrial pacing were investigated by electrophysiological studies to determine which was more effective for suppressing AF induction; single site pacing of the right atrial appendage (RAA) or distal coronary sinus (CS-d), or biatrial (simultaneous BAA and CS-d) pacing. In the AF group, AF inducibility was significantly higher with BAA extrastimulus during RAA (12/20; P < 0.0001) or biatrial paced drive (7/20; P < 0.01) than during CS-d paced drive (0/20). In the control group, AF was not induced at any site paced. In the AF group, the conduction delay and other parameters of atrial vulnerability significantly improved during CS-d paced drive. The atrial recovery time (ART) at RAA and CS-d was measured during each basic pacing mode. ART was defined as the sum of the activation time and refractory period, and the difference between ARTs at RAA and CS-d was calculated as the ART difference (ARTD). The ARTD was significantly longer during BAA pacing in the AF group than in control group (155.0 +/- 32.8 vs 128.8 +/- 32.9 ms, P < 0.05). In the AFgroup, ARTDs during biatrial (52.0 +/- 24.2 ms) and CS-d pacing (51.7 +/- 26.0 ms) were significantly shorter than ARTD during RAA pacing. The CS-d paced drive was more effective for suppressing AF induction than biatrial or RAA paced drive by alleviating conduction delay. CS-d and biatrial pacing significantly reduced ARTD compared with RAA pacing.