Department of Cardiology, Ospedale San Giuseppe MultiMedica.
Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano.
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2019 Nov;20(11):745-751. doi: 10.2459/JCM.0000000000000864.
Atrial fibrillation induces reversible electrical and mechanical modifications (atrial remodeling). Atrial stunning is a mechanical dysfunction with preserved bioelectrical function, occurring after successful atrial fibrillation electrical cardioversion (ECV). Two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography is a new technology for evaluating atrial mechanical function. We assessed atrial mechanical function after ECV with serial two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography evaluations. The investigated outcome was left atrium mechanical recovery within 3 months.
A total of 36 patients [mean age 73 (7.9) years, 23 males] with persistent atrial fibrillation underwent conventional transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography before ECV. Positive global atrial strain (GSA+) was assessed at 3 h, 1, 2, 3, 4 weeks and 3 months after ECV. Mechanical recovery was defined as the achievement of a GSA+ value of 21%.
Independent predictors of GSA+ immediately after ECV (basal GSA+) were E/e' ratio and left atrial appendage anterograde flow velocity. During the follow-up, 25% of patients suffered atrial fibrillation recurrence. In 12/36 patients (33%) left atrium mechanical recovery was detected (mechanical recovery group), while in 15/36 (42%) recovery did not occur (no atrial mechanical recovery group). At univariate analysis, the variables associated with recovery, were basal GSA+ (P = 0.015) and maximal velocity left atrial appendage (P = 0.022). Female sex (P = 0.038), N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide (P = 0.013), E/e' (P = 0.042) and the indexed left atrium volume (P = 0.019) were associated with the lack of left atrium mechanical recovery.
In almost half of the patients, the left atrium did not resume mechanical activity within the 3 months after ECV, despite sinus rhythm recovery. The left atrium of these patients was larger, stiffer and their E/E' was higher, suggesting a higher endocavitary pressure compared with mechanical recovery patients. These findings might suggest an increased thromboembolic risk.
心房颤动可引起可逆转的电和机械改变(心房重构)。心房顿抑是一种机械功能障碍,伴有保留的生物电功能,发生在成功的心房颤动电复律(ECV)后。二维斑点追踪超声心动图是评估心房机械功能的新技术。我们通过连续的二维斑点追踪超声心动图评估来评估 ECV 后的心房机械功能。研究结果是 3 个月内左心房机械恢复。
36 例持续性心房颤动患者[平均年龄 73(7.9)岁,23 例男性]在 ECV 前接受了常规经胸和经食管超声心动图检查。在 ECV 后 3 小时、1 周、2 周、3 周和 4 周评估整体心房应变(GSA+)。机械恢复定义为达到 GSA+值≥21%。
ECV 后即刻 GSA+的独立预测因子是 E/e' 比值和左心耳前向血流速度。在随访期间,25%的患者发生心房颤动复发。在 36 例患者中有 12 例(33%)检测到左心房机械恢复(机械恢复组),而在 15 例患者中(42%)未发生恢复(无左心房机械恢复组)。在单变量分析中,与恢复相关的变量是基础 GSA+(P=0.015)和左心耳最大速度(P=0.022)。女性(P=0.038)、N 端脑利钠肽前体(P=0.013)、E/e'(P=0.042)和左心房指数容积(P=0.019)与左心房机械恢复缺失相关。
尽管恢复窦性节律,但在 ECV 后 3 个月内,近一半的患者左心房未能恢复机械活动。这些患者的左心房更大、更僵硬,E/E'更高,提示与机械恢复患者相比,心腔内压力更高。这些发现可能提示血栓栓塞风险增加。