Ohta Yoko, Tanabe Kazuaki, Shimizu Hiromi, Nakamura Ko, Ohta Tetsuro, Shimada Toshio
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Shimane Medical University, Izumo, Japan.
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2002 Oct;15(10 Pt 1):1087-93. doi: 10.1067/mje.2002.122082.
The origin of the pulmonary venous (PV) systolic flow wave is still unclear and could be the atrial relaxation and systolic descent of the atrioventricular plane, which decrease atrial pressure (suction) or raised PV pressure. In atrial fibrillation (AF), loss of atrial contraction and relaxation significantly modifies the systolic PV flow wave. The effect of recumbent positional changes on PV, however, has not yet been characterized in AF. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of positional changes on systolic PV flow in patients with AF studied by transesophageal echocardiography. The study group consisted of 45 patients with AF (34 patients with AF, alone, and 11 patients with mitral stenosis [MS]). To assess the influence of left atrial pressure, we included patients with MS and AF. Pulsed wave Doppler transesophageal echocardiography of the left and right upper PV were performed in the left lateral recumbent position in all patients and repeated records were obtained with the subject in the supine position in 25 (AF alone: n = 20, MS: n = 5) of 45 patients. In the left lateral recumbent position, the systolic PV flow velocity and systolic fraction of the left PV, which were recorded on the recumbent subject's lower side, were significantly increased compared with those of the right PV in both AF alone and MS with AF (33.9 +/- 10.8 vs 13.8 +/- 6.4 cm/s, 0.45 +/- 0.09 vs 0.20 +/- 0.10 in AF alone; 30.2 +/- 11.7 vs 14.6 +/- 6.0 cm/s, 0.43 +/- 0.12 vs 0.20 +/- 0.07 in MS, respectively, P < .01). By changing the position from the left lateral to the supine position, systolic PV flow velocity and systolic fraction of the left and right PV became the same (29.3 +/- 8.4 vs 27.9 +/- 8.4 cm/s, 0.39 +/- 0.09 vs 0.36 +/- 0.06 in AF alone, 23.5 +/- 8.8 vs 27.5 +/- 5.0 cm/s, 0.35 +/- 0.08 vs 0.35 +/- 0.09 in MS, respectively). These findings show that the PV volume (hydrostatic pressure) significantly modifies systolic PV flow wave in patients without atrial contraction and relaxation. We should take into consideration the body position on which PV flow is studied.
肺静脉(PV)收缩期血流波的起源仍不清楚,可能是心房舒张以及房室平面的收缩期下移,这会降低心房压力(抽吸作用)或升高肺静脉压力。在心房颤动(AF)中,心房收缩和舒张的丧失会显著改变肺静脉收缩期血流波。然而,卧位姿势变化对房颤患者肺静脉的影响尚未得到明确描述。本研究的目的是通过经食管超声心动图评估体位变化对房颤患者肺静脉收缩期血流的影响。研究组由45例房颤患者组成(34例单纯房颤患者和11例二尖瓣狭窄[MS]合并房颤患者)。为了评估左心房压力的影响,我们纳入了二尖瓣狭窄合并房颤的患者。对所有患者在左侧卧位时进行左右肺静脉的脉冲波多普勒经食管超声心动图检查,并对45例患者中的25例(单纯房颤:n = 20,二尖瓣狭窄:n = 5)在仰卧位时重复记录。在左侧卧位时,在卧位受试者下侧记录的左肺静脉收缩期血流速度和收缩分数,在单纯房颤组和二尖瓣狭窄合并房颤组中均显著高于右肺静脉(单纯房颤组分别为33.9±10.8 vs 13.8±6.4 cm/s,0.45±0.09 vs 0.20±0.10;二尖瓣狭窄组分别为30.2±11.7 vs 14.6±6.0 cm/s,0.43±0.12 vs 0.20±0.07,P <.01)。通过将体位从左侧卧位改变为仰卧位,左右肺静脉的收缩期血流速度和收缩分数变得相同(单纯房颤组分别为29.3±8.4 vs 27.9±8.4 cm/s,0.39±0.09 vs 0.36±0.06;二尖瓣狭窄组分别为23.5±8.8 vs 27.5±5.0 cm/s,0.35±0.08 vs 0.35±0.09)。这些发现表明,在没有心房收缩和舒张的患者中,肺静脉容量(流体静压)会显著改变肺静脉收缩期血流波。我们在研究肺静脉血流时应考虑身体体位。