Key result
Intra-atrial block is linked to increased risks of AF, thromboembolic events, and mortality.
Why the study?
Intra-atrial block (IAB) has been associated with several adverse outcomes including atrial fibrillation and increased mortality, but its clinical significance remains underrecognized.
This review highlights the importance of recognizing intra-atrial block on ECGs due to its association with atrial fibrillation and other adverse clinical outcomes.
Variable IAB definitions across decades may confound ECG interpretation; leaves open need for standardized criteria in research and practice.
In 1916, Bachmann first reported on the inter-auricular time interval. However relatively little attention was paid to this ECG measurement for decades. Then, in 1956, Samuel Bradley and Henry JJ Marriott reported on intra-atrial block (IAB) in 4,500 ECGs.As defined by them, IAB was a P wave duration of 0.12 sec or longer. Since that time, others have defined IAB as 0.11 sec or longer or 0.12 sec or longer. Several authors have suggested subcategories, such as first-, second-, and third-degree patterns and some have defined specific intra-atrial and inter-atrial pathways. These are of electrocardiographic interest but have not been substantiated as related to different clinical outcomes. Many disorders have been associated with IAB. More importantly, however, IAB has been associated with several adverse outcomes, including sinus node dysfunction, atrial tachyarrhythmias - especially atrial fibrillation, thromboembolic events, and increased mortality. This brief review will detail the above to emphasize to ECG readers the importance of not overlooking IAB in their interpretations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Reiffel James A. (2019) conducted a review in Intra-atrial block. Intra-atrial block was evaluated. Intra-atrial block is associated with several adverse outcomes, including sinus node dysfunction, atrial fibrillation, thromboembolic events, and increased mortality.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: