[Electrophysiological Cardiac Parameters and Results of Antiarrhythmic Treatment in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (Lone and Associated with Arterial Hypertension)].

PURPOSE

to assess cardiac electrophysiological parameters in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), lone or with concomitant arterial hypertension (AH), and their prognostic significance relative to treatment effectiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We included in this study 184 patients with paroxysmal AF (84 with concomitant AH and 100 with presumed lone AF). Cardiac electrophysiological study was performed in accordance with standardized protocol that included assessment of sinus node recovery time, sinoatrial, intraatrial and interatrial conduction time, and effective refractory periods (ERP) of right and left atria and atrioventricular node. Patients with inducible supraventricular reentrant arrhythmias that could potentially trigger AF underwent catheter radiofrequency ablation of those arrhythmias. Other patients received either antiarrhythmic drug therapy (AAD; n=79) or catheter cryo-ablation (CBA; n=81). Treatment was considered ineffective in case of any symptomatic or asymptomatic AF episode documented by ECG or Holter ECG within 12 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

Patients with lone AF compared with those with AH had shorter ERP of the right atrium (219±21 ms vs. 253±44 ms, respectively, p<0.05) and more prominent dispersion of ERP of right and left atria (median 40 ms, interquartile range 10-50 ms vs. median 20 ms, interquartile range 10-22.5 ms, respectively, p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in other electrophysiology parameters between the groups. Sustained supraventricular reentrant arrhythmias were induced in 9% (9 of 100) patients with presumed lone AF and in 1.2% (1 of 84) patients with AH (p<0.05). All these arrhythmias were successfully ablated, and patients had no AF recurrence during 12-month follow-up. Among other patient treatment (CBA n=81, AAD n=79) was effective in 64% of those with lone AFib and in 34% - with AH (p<0.05). In multivariate multiple regression analysis, none of electrophysiological parameters could be assumed as a factor associated with the efficacy of CBA or AAD.

CONCLUSION

Patients with lone AF had more prominent atrial electrophysiological inhomogeneity compared with patients with concomitant AH. Cardiac electrophysiological parameters had no influence on effectiveness of antiarrhythmic treatment.