Santini Massimo, Pignalberi Carlo, Ricci Renato, Calò Leonardo
Department of Cardiology, San Filippo Neri Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Ital Heart J. 2002 Oct;3(10):571-8.
Antiarrhythmic drugs have shown a poor long-term efficacy in the management of atrial fibrillation. It has been suggested that the association of antiarrhythmic drugs and non-pharmacological treatments may be superior to the prescription of a single treatment only. Electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation can be ineffective in several cases (long-lasting atrial fibrillation, large atria, advanced age, underlying diseases, high transthoracic impedance): the prescription of antiarrhythmic drugs prior to electrical shock has been demonstrated to be able to increase the success rate and to reduce the energy requirement. Ibutilide, amiodarone and sotalol are the most effective, while the efficacy of class IC drugs is controversial. The use of conventional atrial stimulation in case of the brady-tachy syndrome is related to the need of sustaining the atrial rhythm during bradycardia which can be exacerbated by the use of antiarrhythmic drugs. New overdrive algorithms, such as consistent atrial pacing and atrial rate stabilization, can increase the efficacy of physiological pacing. Painless electrical therapies, such as ramp and burst, have been implemented in specific devices, in order to combine the prevention and treatment of atrial arrhythmias. Multisite atrial stimulation has been introduced to improve the activation sequence and to reduce atrial asynchrony in case of slow conduction in the right atrium and of retrograde activation of the left atrium. Two methods are available for multisite atrial pacing: 1) simultaneous biatrial stimulation with the leads placed in the right appendage and in the left atrium through the coronary sinus; 2) dual site right atrial pacing with the leads positioned in the roof of the right atrium and proximal to the ostium of the coronary sinus. Single site non-conventional atrial pacing with the lead placed at the level of the interatrial septum, in the triangle of Koch, has been proposed in order to modulate the anisotropic conduction of this zone, responsible for the onset of atrial fibrillation. Non-conventional stimulation in association with drug therapy has been demonstrated to be more effective than conventional pacing in reducing the incidence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. The use of a dual-chamber defibrillator equipped with painless antitachy pacing therapies and atrial cardioversion can be considered the next step in the evolution of implantable devices. Atrioventricular nodal ablation and pacemaker implantation (ablate and pace) has been the first radiofrequency ablation procedure used to control the atrial fibrillation rate. Recently, it has been demonstrated that the survival rate in these patients was similar to that observed in subjects who received antiarrhythmic therapy. In patients in whom the administration of antiarrhythmic drugs (mainly class IC or amiodarone) modified atrial fibrillation in atrial flutter, linear lesions on the isthmus have been demonstrated to be effective in inhibiting the recurrence of arrhythmia. The first approach attempted in order to directly treat atrial fibrillation was the creation of linear lesions in the right atrium by means of radiofrequency current in patients refractory to drug therapy. This procedure was found to be feasible and safe, while lesions on the left atrium were associated with a high rate of side effects. The aim of the lesions was to create block lines in intra-atrial conduction, in order to electrically compartmentalize the atria and to avoid the propagation of reentry waves. More recently the ablation of the automatic activity originating from the posterior wall of the left atrium or within the pulmonary veins, which can trigger the onset of atrial fibrillation, has been performed.
抗心律失常药物在房颤治疗中显示出较差的长期疗效。有人提出,抗心律失常药物与非药物治疗联合使用可能优于仅采用单一治疗方法。房颤的电复律在某些情况下可能无效(持续性房颤、心房增大、高龄、基础疾病、经胸阻抗高):电击前使用抗心律失常药物已被证明能够提高成功率并降低能量需求。伊布利特、胺碘酮和索他洛尔最为有效,而IC类药物的疗效存在争议。在缓慢性心律失常综合征中使用传统心房刺激与在心动过缓期间维持心房节律的需求有关,而抗心律失常药物的使用可能会加重这种情况。新的超速驱动算法,如一致性心房起搏和心房率稳定,可提高生理性起搏的疗效。为了将房颤的预防和治疗相结合,特定设备中已采用了无痛电疗法,如斜坡和猝发刺激。引入多部位心房刺激以改善激动顺序,并在右心房传导缓慢和左心房逆向激动的情况下减少心房不同步。多部位心房起搏有两种方法:1)通过冠状窦将电极置于右心耳和左心房进行双心房同步刺激;2)将电极置于右心房顶部和冠状窦口近端进行右心房双部位起搏。有人提出在房间隔水平、科赫三角区放置电极进行单部位非传统心房起搏,以调节该区域的各向异性传导,该区域与房颤的发生有关。已证明非传统刺激与药物治疗联合使用在降低阵发性房颤发生率方面比传统起搏更有效。使用配备无痛抗心动过速起搏疗法和心房复律功能的双腔除颤器可被视为植入式设备发展的下一步。房室结消融和起搏器植入(消融并起搏)是最早用于控制房颤心率的射频消融手术。最近,已证明这些患者的生存率与接受抗心律失常治疗的患者相似。在使用抗心律失常药物(主要是IC类或胺碘酮)将房颤转变为房扑的患者中,峡部线性消融已被证明可有效抑制心律失常复发。为直接治疗房颤而尝试的第一种方法是对药物治疗无效的患者通过射频电流在右心房制造线性损伤。该手术被认为是可行和安全的,而左心房损伤的副作用发生率较高。这些损伤的目的是在心房内传导中制造阻滞线,以便将心房电分隔并避免折返波的传播。最近,已对源自左心房后壁或肺静脉内的可触发房颤发作的自律性活动进行了消融。