Riccardi R, Gaita F, Giustetto C, Gardiol S
Division of Cardiology, Ospedale Civile di Asti, University of Torino, Italy.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1997 May;20(5 Pt 1):1318-27. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1997.tb06786.x.
Clinical electrophysiology has not yet clearly defined atrial features that can predict spontaneous occurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this work was to identify atrial electrophysiological features that can distinguish Wolff-Parkinson-White patients with spontaneous AF from those without this arrhythmia. Sixty-nine patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White were divided into three groups: group I (16 patients) with spontaneous AF; group II (35 patients) with reciprocating tachycardia but not AF; and group III (18 patients) asymptomatic without documented arrhythmias. Atrial effective refractory periods (ERPs) and intraatrial conduction times in response to premature extrastimuli were analyzed. The latter were evaluated as the A1A2 interval minus the correspondent S1S2 interval (A1A2-S1S2), S1A2 and the interval A1A2 following the shortest S1S2 producing atrial activation (FRP'). All the parameters have been evaluated in two atrial sites and at two atrial pacing cycle lengths (600 and 400 ms). For all the parameters, the difference ("gradient") was calculated between the values of the same parameter measured at the atrial pacing cycle length of 600 ms and that found at the atrial pacing cycle length of 400 ms in the same recording site in each patient was calculated. Atrial ERP did not differ significantly in the three groups. Intraatrial conduction parameters, evaluated in the high right atrium (HRA), were longer when measured at an atrial pacing of 400 ms and showed a lack of rate adaptation in patients with spontaneous AF. In group I patients in particular, FRP' became longer with the increase of atrial rate, while in groups 2 and 3, it usually shortened. The mean gradient of HRA FRP' was -15.0 +/- 19 ms in group I as compared to 5.7 +/- 13 ms in group II and 6.4 +/- 13 ms in group III (P < 0.001); sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value of a negative gradient in the identification of patients with spontaneous AF, were, respectively, 83%, 75%, and 93%. Patients from groups 2 and 3 did not differ in any of the analyzed parameters. Patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White and spontaneous AF showed prolonged intraatrial conduction times and a different behavior in response to modification of heart rate.
临床电生理学尚未明确界定能够预测房颤(AF)自发发生的心房特征。本研究的目的是确定能将伴有自发房颤的预激综合征患者与无此心律失常的患者区分开来的心房电生理特征。69例预激综合征患者被分为三组:第一组(16例)有自发房颤;第二组(35例)有折返性心动过速但无房颤;第三组(18例)无症状且无心律失常记录。分析了心房有效不应期(ERP)以及对早搏刺激的心房内传导时间。后者被评估为A1A2间期减去相应的S1S2间期(A1A2 - S1S2)、S1A2以及在产生心房激动的最短S1S2之后的A1A2间期(FRP')。所有参数均在两个心房部位以及两个心房起搏周期长度(600和400毫秒)下进行评估。对于所有参数,计算每个患者在心房起搏周期长度600毫秒时测量的相同参数值与在同一记录部位心房起搏周期长度400毫秒时测得的值之间的差异(“梯度”)。三组患者的心房ERP无显著差异。在高位右心房(HRA)评估的心房内传导参数,在心房起搏为400毫秒时测量值更长,且伴有自发房颤的患者显示缺乏心率适应性。特别是在第一组患者中,FRP'随心房率增加而变长,而在第二组和第三组中,它通常缩短。第一组HRA FRP'的平均梯度为 -15.0±19毫秒,第二组为5.7±13毫秒,第三组为6.4±(此处原文有误,推测应为6.4±13毫秒)13毫秒(P < 0.001);负梯度在识别自发房颤患者中的敏感性、特异性和阴性预测值分别为83%、75%和93%。第二组和第三组患者在任何分析参数上均无差异。伴有自发房颤的预激综合征患者显示心房内传导时间延长,且对心率改变有不同表现。