De Sisti A, Leclercq J F, Fiorello P, Di Lorenzo M, Manot S, Halimi F, Attuel P
Divisione di Cardiologia, Ospedale Sandro Pertini, Roma.
Cardiologia. 1999 Apr;44(4):361-7.
Clinical electrophysiology has focused the attention on the electrophysiological properties of the atrial muscle in patients with atrial fibrillation: shortened and inhomogeneous refractoriness and local and regional conduction slowing, as well as prolonged intra- and interatrial conduction disturbances, are well described as electrophysiological parameters associated with the genesis of atrial fibrillation. Patients with sick sinus syndrome are variously included in these studies, but electrophysiological characteristics of patients with sick sinus syndrome alone appear less investigated, even if atrial fibrillation is part of its natural history. The aim of the present study was to define the electrophysiological characteristics of sick sinus syndrome patients with or without paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, compared to subjects without atrial fibrillation and sick sinus syndrome.
We reviewed the electrophysiological data of 39 patients with sick sinus syndrome (mean age 70 +/- 8 years), who underwent an electrophysiological study in sinus rhythm for the evaluation of the atrial substrate. In 12 patients an associated history of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation was documented. Twenty-seven patients were included in the study with a diagnosis of sinus node dysfunction alone. We also considered as control group 25 subjects (mean age 63 +/- 14 years), referred to our electrophysiological laboratory for unexplained syncope or atrioventricular disturbances. Following pharmacological wash-out and at a drive cycle of 600 ms, effective and functional refractory periods, S1-A1 and S2-A2 latency, A1 and A2 width, and the latent vulnerability index (effective refractory period/A2), were measured. In addition, the P-wave duration during spontaneous sinus rhythm on the surface ECG in D II/V1 leads was measured.
Between sick sinus syndrome patients with or without atrial fibrillation, no significant statistical differences in electrophysiological parameters were found. When compared to the control group, sick sinus syndrome patients did not show any differences in effective refractory period (239 +/- 34 vs 250 +/- 29 ms), functional refractory period (276 +/- 28 vs 280 +/- 32 ms), S1-A1 (38 +/- 16 vs 33 +/- 11 ms), and S2-A2 latency (68 +/- 25 vs 63 +/- 25 ms). In contrast, we observed remarkable differences in terms of atriogram duration A1 (60 +/- 20 vs 39 +/- 13 ms, p < 0.001), A2 (95 +/- 34 vs 57 +/- 18 ms, p < 0.001), and effective refractory period/A2 (2.8 +/- 1.2 vs 4.8 +/- 1.7 cm, p < 0.001). Also the duration of the P wave was longer (103 +/- 17 vs 94 +/- 45 ms, p < 0.05).
In sick sinus syndrome patients with or without atrial fibrillation, electrophysiological characteristics appear homogeneous. When compared to the control group, refractoriness was quite similar. In contrast, the most important abnormalities appear based on conduction slowing disturbances, responsible for a low latent vulnerability index. This could explain, at least in part, the tendency of sick sinus syndrome to develop atrial fibrillation as a part of its natural history. At present, the influence of an altered electrophysiological substrate on pharmacological or pacing therapy in patients with sick sinus syndrome is not yet known.
临床电生理学一直关注心房颤动患者心房肌的电生理特性:不应期缩短且不均匀、局部和区域传导减慢,以及房内和房间传导障碍延长,这些作为与心房颤动发生相关的电生理参数已得到充分描述。病态窦房结综合征患者在这些研究中被不同程度地纳入,但单独患有病态窦房结综合征患者的电生理特征似乎较少被研究,即便心房颤动是其自然病史的一部分。本研究的目的是确定合并或不合并阵发性心房颤动的病态窦房结综合征患者的电生理特征,并与无心房颤动和病态窦房结综合征的受试者进行比较。
我们回顾了39例病态窦房结综合征患者(平均年龄70±8岁)的电生理数据,这些患者在窦性心律下接受了电生理检查以评估心房基质。其中12例患者有阵发性心房颤动的相关病史记录。27例患者仅诊断为窦房结功能障碍,被纳入本研究。我们还将25例受试者(平均年龄63±14岁)作为对照组,这些受试者因不明原因晕厥或房室传导障碍被转诊至我们的电生理实验室。在药物洗脱后,以600毫秒的驱动周期,测量有效和功能不应期、S1 - A1和S2 - A2潜伏期、A1和A2宽度以及潜在易损性指数(有效不应期/A2)。此外,测量体表心电图DⅡ/V1导联在自发窦性心律时的P波持续时间。
在合并或不合并心房颤动的病态窦房结综合征患者之间,未发现电生理参数有显著统计学差异。与对照组相比,病态窦房结综合征患者在有效不应期(239±34对250±29毫秒)、功能不应期(276±28对280±32毫秒)、S1 - A1(38±16对33±11毫秒)和S2 - A2潜伏期(68±25对63±25毫秒)方面均无差异。相比之下,我们观察到在心房电图持续时间A1(60±20对39±13毫秒,p<0.001)、A2(95±34对57±18毫秒,p<0.001)以及有效不应期/A2(2.8±1.2对4.8±1.7厘米,p<0.001)方面存在显著差异。P波持续时间也更长(103±17对94±45毫秒,p<0.05)。
合并或不合并心房颤动的病态窦房结综合征患者,其电生理特征似乎是相同的。与对照组相比,不应期相当相似。相比之下,最重要的异常似乎基于传导减慢障碍,这导致潜在易损性指数较低。这至少可以部分解释病态窦房结综合征在其自然病史中发展为心房颤动的倾向。目前,尚不清楚电生理基质改变对病态窦房结综合征患者药物或起搏治疗的影响。