Atrial pacing periablation for prevention of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: This study tested the hypothesis that rate-adaptive atrial pacing would prevent paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) in patients with frequent PAF in the absence of symptomatic bradycardia. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n=97) with antiarrhythmic drug-refractory PAF received a Medtronic Thera DR pacemaker 3 months before planned AV node ablation. Patients were randomized to no pacing (n=48) or to atrial rate-adaptive pacing (n=49). After a 2-week stabilization period, patients were followed up for an additional 10 weeks. The time to first recurrence of sustained PAF, the interval between successive episodes of PAF, and the frequency of PAF were compared between the 2 groups in intention-to-treat analysis. Time to first episode of sustained PAF was similar in the no-pacing (4.2 days; 95% CI, 1.8 to 9.5) and the atrial-pacing (1.9 days; 95% CI, 0.8 to 4.6; P=NS) groups. PAF burden was lower in the no-pacing (0.24 h/d; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.56) than in the atrial-pacing (0.67 h/d; 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.52; P=0.08) group. Paired crossover analysis in 11 patients revealed that time to first PAF was shorter during atrial pacing (1.6 days; 95% CI, 0.6 to 4.9) than with no pacing (6.0 days; 95% CI, 2.4 to 15.0; P=0.13), and PAF burden was greater during atrial pacing (1.00 h/d; 95% CI, 0.35 to 2.91) than with no pacing (0.32 h/d; 95% CI, 0.09 to 1.13; P<0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Atrial rate-adaptive pacing does not prevent PAF over the short term in patients with antiarrhythmic drug-resistant PAF without symptomatic bradycardia.     

Atrial septal pacing in the prevention of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation refractory to antiarrhythmic drugs

BACKGROUND: Early reports have shown that pacing the atria at a site or sites other than the right atrial appendage may prevent atrial fibrillation. Our centre has shown that pacing the atrial septum reduces the duration of atrial activation which is an important determinant of predisposition to paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Ablation of the atrioventricular (AV) node together with implantation of a pacemaker can control symptoms due to paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients in whom antiarrhythmic drugs have failed. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of atrial septal pacing on patients who were candidates for AV node ablation. METHODS: Atrial septal pacemakers were implanted in 28 patients with symptomatic, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation that had been unresponsive to two or more antiarrhythmic drugs. Pacing was not indicated for any reason other than the anticipated need to proceed to AV node ablation. Change in symptoms was assessed by quality of life questionnaires and recurrence of atrial fibrillation was measured objectively by pacemaker interrogation and ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring. RESULTS: Atrial septal pacing in combination with an antiarrhythmic agent resulted in a substantial subjective improvement in 19 patients (68%). Objective data confirmed similar findings; atrial fibrillation was completely or markedly reduced in 17 patients (60%). Six patients experienced a modest improvement in symptoms; in only four patients was it necessary to proceed to AV node ablation. CONCLUSIONS: Atrial septal pacing together with continuance of previously ineffective antiarrhythmic therapy may prevent or markedly reduce the frequency of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and obviate the need to ablate the AV node.     

Biatrial pacing for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized prospective study into the suppression of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation using biatrial pacing

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was twofold: to assess whether biatrial pacing is superior to single-site pacing and capable of reducing the frequency of episodes of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF); and to compare pacing of the proximal coronary sinus (PCS) with the distal coronary sinus (DCS) and the effects of sequential or simultaneous biatrial pacing. BACKGROUND: Interatrial conduction abnormalities have a role in the initiation of PAF. Biatrial pacing alters the site and timing of atrial depolarization and may benefit those with drug-resistant PAF. METHODS: Nineteen patients with PAF who were intolerant of or refractory to medication were studied. All received right atrial (RA) and coronary sinus (CS) leads (either PCS or DCS). For three months the pacemaker was set in sensing mode only. Subsequently each patient completed three-month periods in random order in the following modes: RA pacing, CS pacing, biatrial pacing using inter-atrial delays of 15 and 70 ms. RESULTS: Sixteen patients received a benefit from one or more pacing modes. The greatest reduction in PAF episodes was seen during biatrial pacing, especially with leads sited at the high right atrium (HRA) and distal CS (p = 0.0048). There was no difference for sequential or simultaneous pacing. Three patients derived no benefit. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients, biatrial pacing causes a significant decrease in atrial fibrillation episodes. Optimal lead sites were at the HRA and DCS. Simultaneous pacing conferred no benefit over sequential pacing.     

Atrial pacing for the prevention and termination of atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects about 2% of the general population and 8%–11% of those older than 65 years. The demand for effective therapeutic strategies for AF is anticipated to increase substantially as the proportion of the elderly population increases. Atrioventricular nodal ablation accompanied by permanent pacemaker implantation is an established option in elderly patients with intractable arrhythmia and poor ventricular rate control. However, it renders most patients pacemaker dependent and does not eliminate symptoms associated with loss of atrial transport or reduce the risk of stroke. The considerable limitations of rhythm or rate control strategies prompted interest in preventative atrial pacing, which may reduce the incidence of AF by either eliminating the triggers and/or by modifying the substrate of AF. Atrial or dual-chamber pacing has been proven to prevent or delay progression to permanent AF in elderly patients with sinus node dysfunction as compared with ventricular pacing. Patients with advanced atrial conduction delay may benefit from 'atrial resynchronization' pacing. There may be additional benefits associated with the use of particular sites of pacing, specific pacing algorithms designed to target potential triggers of AF, and pace-termination of atrial tachycardia. Preventive and antitachycardia pacing algorithms incorporated in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and pacemakers are currently under investigation and may offer a valuable alternative to antiarrhythmic drug therapy in elderly patients with left ventricular dysfunction at high risk of proarrhythmia or worsening heart failure. The evolution of 'hybrid' therapy, in which two or more different strategies are employed in the same patient, may be the most effective approach to management of AF.     

Conventional and dedicated atrial overdrive pacing for the prevention of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the AFTherapy study.

AIMS: This investigation was conducted to determine the effectiveness of several conventional overdrive pacing modalities (single rate and rate responsive pacing at various lower rates) and of four dedicated preventive pacing algorithms in the suppression of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). METHOD AND RESULTS: In this multi-centre, randomized trial, 372 patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal AF were enrolled. Patients received a dual-chamber pacing device capable of delivering conventional pacing therapy as well as dedicated AF prevention pacing therapies and to record detailed AF-related diagnostics. The primary endpoint was AF burden, whereas secondary endpoints were time to first AF episode and averaged sinus rhythm duration. During a conventional pacing phase, patients were randomized to single rate or rate-responsive pacing with lower rates of either 70 or 85 min(-1) or to a control group with single rate pacing at 40 min(-1). In the subsequent preventive pacing phase, patients underwent pacing at a lower rate of 70 min(-1) with or without concomitant application of four preventive pacing algorithms. A substantial amount of data was excluded from the analysis because of atrial-sensing artefacts, identified in the device-captured diagnostics. In the conventional pacing phase, no significant differences were found between various lower rates and the control group receiving single rate pacing at 40 min(-1) or between single rate and rate-responsive pacing. Patients receiving preventive pacing with all four therapies enabled had a similar AF burden compared with patients treated with conventional pacing at 70 min(-1) (P = 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: The results do not demonstrate a significant effect of conventional atrial overdrive pacing or preventive pacing therapies. However, the observations provided important information for further consideration with respect to the design and conduct of future studies on the effect of atrial pacing therapies for the reduction of AF.     

Atrial pacing for the prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardiovascular surgery

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of atrial pacing in the prevention of atrial fibrillation following cardiovascular surgery. BACKGROUND: Although pharmacologic therapy has been used to help prevent postoperative atrial fibrillation, it suffers from limited efficacy and adverse effects. In the nonoperative setting, novel pacing strategies have been shown to reduce recurrences of atrial fibrillation and prolong arrhythmia-free periods in patients with paroxysmal atrial arrhythmias. METHODS: A total of 154 patients (115 men; mean age, 65 +/- 10 years; ejection fraction, 53 +/- 10%) undergoing cardiac surgery (coronary artery bypass surgery, 88.3%; aortic valve replacement, 4.5%; coronary bypass + aortic valve replacement, 7.1%) had right and left atrial epicardial pacing electrodes placed at the time of surgery. Patients were randomized to either no pacing, right atrial (RAP), left atrial (LAP) or biatrial pacing (BAP) for 72 h after surgery. Beta-adrenergic blocking agents were administered concurrently to all patients following surgery. RESULTS: There was a reduction in the incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation from 37.5% in patients receiving no postoperative pacing to 17% (p < 0.005) in patients assigned to one of the three pacing strategies. The length of hospital stay was reduced by 22% from 7.8 +/- 3.7 days to 6.1 +/- 2.3 days (p = 0.003) in patients assigned to postoperative atrial pacing. The incidence of atrial fibrillation was lower in each of the paced groups (RAP, 8%; LAP, 20%; BAP, 26%) compared with patients who did not receive postoperative pacing (37.5%). CONCLUSION: Postoperative atrial pacing, in conjunction with beta-blockade, significantly reduced both the incidence of atrial fibrillation and the length of hospital stay following cardiovascular surgery. Additional studies are needed to determine the most effective anatomic pacing site.     

No incremental benefit of multisite atrial pacing compared with right atrial pacing in patients with drug refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

OBJECTIVE—To evaluate the incremental antifibrillatory effect of multisite atrial pacing compared with right atrial pacing in patients with drug refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation paced for arrhythmia prevention alone.
METHODS—In 20 of these patients (mean (SD) age 64 (8) years; 14 female, six male), a single blinded randomised crossover study was performed to investigate the incremental benefit of one month of multisite atrial pacing compared with one month of right atrial pacing. Outcomes included the number of episodes of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, their total duration obtained from pacemaker Holter memory, and quality of life using a cardiac specific questionnaire (the modified Karolinska questionnaire).
RESULTS—Comparing right atrial with multisite atrial pacing, there was no significant change in either the number of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation episodes (mean (SD): right atrial pacing 77 (98) episodes v multisite pacing 52 (78) episodes, NS) or their total duration (right atrial, 4.8 (5.4) days v multisite, 6.3 (9.8) days, NS). Quality of life scores compared with baseline status were equally improved by either pacing strategy (mean percentage improvement: right atrial, 38%, p = 0.003; multisite, 44%, p = 0.003). There was no significant difference in life scores comparing the two pacing modes.
CONCLUSIONS—Multisite atrial pacing has no incremental antiarrhythmic effect compared with right atrial pacing in patients paced for drug refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Quality of life is equally improved with either pacing strategy, with no differences between them.


Keywords: multisite atrial pacing; atrial fibrillation; pacing     

Atrial pacing for prevention of atrial fibrillation: assessment of simultaneously implemented algorithms.

AIMS: Several preliminary studies indicated that right atrial pacing could prevent atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATA). We sought to compare the safety and the efficacy of atrial-based pacing supplemented by dedicated combined algorithms with conventional atrial pacing in the prevention of ATA. METHODS: Fifty-five patients with a history of recurrent paroxysmal ATA implanted with a dual-chamber pacemaker were studied during two randomized cross-over pacing periods (conventional DDD and DDD with ATA prevention algorithms) of 6 months duration. The primary endpoint was the burden of ATA episodes recorded by the device mode switch algorithm. RESULTS: The cross-over analysis did not demonstrate any significant difference between the two pacing modes: 254+/-533 h of ATA during the control period versus 238+/-518 h during the ATA prevention period. Analysis of a subgroup of patients found that those with the lower percentage of ventricular pacing benefited from ATA prevention algorithms (120+/-182 h versus 225+/-350 h during the control period; P < 0.04). CONCLUSION: When compared with DDD pacing at 70 bpm, ATA prevention algorithms have not demonstrated significant efficacy. However, a subgroup of patients with preserved native AV conduction (low percentage of ventricular pacing) responded to ATA prevention algorithms.     

Right atrial preventive and antitachycardia pacing for prevention of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients without bradycardia: a randomized study.

AIMS: To investigate the efficacy of preventive and antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) without bradyarrhythmias. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this randomized cross-over pilot study, we randomized 38 symptomatic paroxysmal AF patients 'without' bradyarrhythmias to atrial pacing lower rate 70 ppm and prevention and ATP therapies ON or to atrial pacing lower rate 34 ppm and prevention and ATP therapies OFF during 12 weeks with a 4 week washout period in between. The atrial lead was preferably placed in the inter-atrial septum. Antiarrhythmic drugs were continued during the study. Primary endpoint was AF burden. Mean age was 62 +/- 9 years and 27 (71%) patients had lone AF. Septal lead placement was accomplished in 26 (68%) patients. During the treatment ON, there was a trend for AF burden reduction [from median 3.3% (1.0-15.2) to 2.4% (0.2-12.2), P = 0.06, reduction 27%]. If septal lead placement was accomplished, AF burden reduction was statistically significant [44% reduction, from median 2.5% (1.0-8.0) to 1.4% (0.2-8.4), P = 0.03]. Quality of life and symptoms did not change, also not in the septal group. CONCLUSION: A hybrid therapy of preventive and ATP pacing and antiarrhythmic drugs may significantly reduce but not abolish AF burden if septal pacing is realized.     

Evaluation of bi-atrial pacing and single site right atrial pacing for the prevention of atrial fibrillation.

Atrial resynchronization resulting from simultaneous pacing of the atria may adjust inter- or intra-atrial asynchrony and prevent atrial fibrillation (AF). The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of bi-atrial pacing (BAP) in preventing AF, and the safety of this system. The effect of BAP was compared with single site right atrial pacing (RAP) in 6 patients with sick sinus syndrome and paroxysmal AF in a prospective switchover trial. P wave duration was significantly reduced during BAP (p<0.01). Pacing threshold, atrial wave amplitude and the lead impedance presented no significant differences at implant, 1 week and 3 months after implantation, respectively (NS). The number of AF episodes significantly decreased during both RAP and BAP compared with the control (p<0.01). Although the number of premature atrial contractions was significantly less during BAP than RAP (p<0.05), there were no significant differences of AF episodes between the two. The percentage of pacing was achieved in only 70% during both pacing modes. BAP was safe and reliable in this follow-up period and can prevent AF. These findings provide encouragement for further study and observation of BAP to prevent AF.     

双心房右心室起搏器治疗阵发性心房颤动的临床应用

目的　观察双心房右心室三腔起搏治疗快速性房性心律失常的临床效果。探讨双心房右心室三腔起搏运用的原理 ,适应证以及起搏模式的选择。方法　患者 6例 ,男性 4例 ,女性 2例 ,诊断 :阵发性心房颤动、房间传导阻滞。置入双心房右心室三腔起搏器。左心房起搏通过冠状静脉窦植入 2 188电极导线 ,左右心房电极导线通过 Y形转接器与双腔起搏器连接。结果　双心房同步起搏后 ,患者阵发性心房颤动的发作明显减少。结论　初步临床应用提示 ,右心室三腔起搏器双心房同步起搏治疗阵发性心房颤动有效。     

Increased mortality in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: report from the Stockholm Cohort-Study of Atrial Fibrillation (SCAF).

AIMS: Whether paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PxAF) affects survival is poorly recognized. Results have been conflicting in the few previously published studies. To describe mortality in patients with PxAF and to identify risk factors amenable to treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients (n=2824) treated for atrial fibrillation during 2002 at one of Scandinavia's largest hospitals were followed prospectively for a mean of 4.6 years. Information about type of AF, comorbidity, and medication was acquired from medical records and national registers. Information about deaths was obtained from the National Cause of Death Register. One-third (n=888) of the patients had PxAF (mean age 73 years). During follow-up, 267 of them died. The mean annual mortality rate was 7%. Compared with the general population, the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) was 1.6 (95% CI 1.4-1.8) for all-cause mortality, 2.4 (95% CI 1.4-3.7) for death from myocardial infarction, and 2.6 (95% CI 1.3-5.2) for death from heart failure. Warfarin treatment was associated with improved survival both in comparison with the general population (SMR 1.1 with warfarin, SMR 2.2 without warfarin) and after propensity score matching for odds to receive warfarin (HR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.9). The improvement of survival could not be explained by stroke reduction alone. CONCLUSION: PxAF is associated with increased mortality, which mostly appears to be related to concomitant cardiovascular risks. Treatment with warfarin is associated with improved survival in PxAF patients.     

特殊心房起搏程序预防和治疗阵发性心房颤动的临床效果

目的评价特殊心房起搏程序预防和治疗阵发性心房颤动(PAF)的临床效果。方法12例病窦综合征合并PAF患者植入Vitatron Selection 900E(AF2.0、DDDR)型双腔起搏器,比较患者术后不同阶段PAF的发作总数、持续时间、AF负荷和心房起搏比率。结果除1例外,其余11例术后第2个月和第6个月(起搏预防阶段)比术后第1个月(监测阶段)的PAF事件数[80(25;215),57(12;102)vs 203(86;425)],房颤总持续时间[1.9 d(0.6d;5.3 d),1.5 d(0.3 d;6.1 d)vs 2.9 d(0.8 d;9.8 d)],AF负荷[6.3%(2.0%;17.7%),5.0%(1.0%;20.6%)vs 9.6%(2.7%;32.8%)]均减低(P均<0.05),心房起搏比率增加[60%(40%;80%),54%(42%;84%)vs46%(26%;54%),P<0.05]。结论预防性心房起搏程序可以减少PAF事件的发生,降低AF负荷,改善患者的症状,具有短期的疗效。     

The use of atrial overdrive and ventricular rate stabilization pacing algorithms for the prevention and treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the Pacemaker Atrial Fibrillation Suppression (PAFS) study.

AIMS: The PAFS study is a randomized, multicentre investigation of the effects of third generation anti-atrial fibrillation pacemaker algorithms in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). METHODS AND RESULTS: 182 patients (72 +/- 9 years, 55% male) with at least three symptomatic episodes of PAF within prior 3 months resistant to two anti-arrhythmics were enrolled. A pacemaker-derived atrial fibrillation (AF) burden of 1-50% was required in the initial induction phase. Seventy-nine patients fulfilled these criteria and were randomized to four, month-long phases in a crossover design. Algorithm phases were 'rate soothing' on, 'ventricular rate stabilization' on, and 'All on', which included these two algorithms plus post-AF response. The algorithm phases were compared to 'All off' dual chamber universal mode (DDD 60) for the analysis. Forty-two percent of patients enrolled in the monitoring phase had no AF. The percentage of AF induced by premature atrial contractions (PACs) was significantly reduced by rate soothing from 25 to 17% (P < 0.05). There was no significant change in AF burden, AF episode number, quality of life, or symptoms with any algorithm (P = ns). CONCLUSION: The rate-soothing algorithm by atrial overdrive pacing reduced PAC-initiated PAF. However, there was no overall change in AF burden, PAF episodes, patient symptoms, or quality of life. Forty-two percent of PAF patients did not show any AF after enrollment, suggesting that bradycardia pacing alone eliminates AF.     

Prevention of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients with sinus bradycardia: role of right atrial linear ablation and pacing site

INTRODUCTION: Right atrial linear lesions (RALL), either alone or in combination with antiarrhythmic drug therapy, may modify the substrate for maintenance of atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this prospective randomized study was to determine whether RALL provides additional benefit to right atrial appendage pacing (RAAP) and/or interatrial septum pacing (IASP) and drug therapy in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF and sinus bradycardia requiring permanent atrial pacing. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-four patients (33 men and 31 women, mean age 73 +/- 10 years) completed the 6-month follow-up. Patients were randomized to either RALL (n = 33) or non-right atrial linear lesions (NRALL), and then to either IASP (n = 32) or RAAP (n = 32). Fifteen RALL patients were paced at the IAS and 18 at the RAA. Seventeen NRALL patients were paced at the IAS and 14 at the RAA. No statistical difference was observed with regard to the mean atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) burden between NRALL (84 +/- 169 min/day) and RALL patients (202 +/- 219 min/day). Mean AT burden was significantly lower in the IASP group (70 +/- 150 min/day) than in RAAP group (219 +/- 317 min/day; P < 0.016). In the RALL group, the mean AT burden was 99 +/- 180 min/day in the IASP patients and 288 +/- 372 min/day in the RAAP patients (P < 0.046). In the NRALL group, no statistical difference in the mean AT burden was observed between IASP patients (46 +/- 117 min/day) and RAAP patients (130 +/- 211 min/day). CONCLUSION: The results of the present study indicate that RALL did not provide any additional therapeutic benefit to combined antiarrhythmic drug therapy and septal or nonseptal atrial pacing in patients with sinus bradycardia and paroxysmal AF.     

Increased base rate of atrial pacing for prevention of atrial fibrillation after implantation of a dual-chamber pacemaker: insights from the Atrial Overdrive Pacing Study.

AIMS: Different pacing sites and various algorithms have been utilized to prevent atrial fibrillation (AF) in pacemaker recipients. However, the optimal pacing rate settings have not yet been established. In this randomized, prospective, multicentre, single-blinded, cross over study, rate-adaptive pacing at a high base rate (BR) in patients, age 60 years or above, or a history of paroxysmal AF, who underwent dual-chamber (DDD) pacemaker implantation for standard pacing indications, was evaluated for prevention of AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the study cohort of 145 patients implanted with DDD pacemakers with a programmable rest rate (RR) feature, the BR/RR settings were sequentially but randomly adjusted as follows: 60 bpm/Off for the baseline quarter (initial 3 months) and then to either 'A-B-C' or 'C-B-A' settings (A = 70/65 bpm, B = 70/Off, C = 80/65 bpm) for the subsequent quarters each of 3 months duration. Data on automatic mode switch episodes, device diagnostics, and a questionnaire evaluating pacemaker awareness and palpitations were collected. Ninety-nine patients, mean age 77 +/- 10 years, who completed the study protocol and followed for 12 months did not show significant differences in the number of mode switch episodes between any settings used. The percentage of atrial pacing was lower during baseline pacing compared to settings A, B, and C (P < 0.0001). Setting C produced a higher percentage of atrial pacing than A and B (P < 0.01). Although a higher percentage of atrial pacing correlated with a lower incidence of mode switch episodes, there was no statistically significant difference in the number of mode switch episodes between settings A, B, and C. There were no significant differences in the questionnaire scores relating to pacemaker awareness or palpitation. CONCLUSION: Overdrive single-site pacing in the right atrium achieved by programming analysed settings in the present study did not reduce AF as assessed by mode switch episodes. Additionally, no change in the symptoms of arrhythmia or awareness of pacing was seen.     

抗房颤起搏器对缓慢心率患者合并阵发性房颤的预防作用

目的评价抗房颤起搏器对缓慢心率患者阵发性房颤(PAF)的预防效果。方法14例心动过缓并PAF患者,12例置入Vitatron900E型起搏器,2例置入St.JudeMedicalIntegrityTMAFXDR5346型起搏器,对患者进行一年随访,记录术后第1月(预防房颤程序未启动)、术后第2月、术后第6月、术后第12月房颤(AF)事件。结果患者术后2个月较术后1个月,术后6个月、12个月较术后第2个月有症状PAF数(9.21±5.47和16.18±9.82;4.31±3.22,3.89±2.87和9.21±5.47),PAF总数(24.31±27.24和46.23±31.52;9.34±8.37,9.16±8.25和24.31±27.24),AF总持续时间[(2.63±1.21)d和(3.18±1.58)d;(1.16±0.86)d,(1.02±0.82)d和(2.63±1.21)d],AF负荷[(8.77±4.57)%和(12.62±5.68)%;(3.86±2.52)%,(3.42±1.79)%和(8.77±4.57)%]均降低(P<0.05)。结论抗房颤起搏器能减低心率缓慢患者阵发性房颤的发生,降低房颤负荷,具有明显的短期及中期疗效。     

Atrial electrophysiological properties evaluated by right and left atrial pacing in patients with or without atrial fibrillation

Coronary sinus (CS) pacing has been shown to prevent induction of atrial fibrillation (AF) by suppression of the propensity of atrial premature beats at high right atrium (HRA) to induce local conduction delay at the posterior triangle of Koch. However, other mechanisms of CS pacing in preventing induction of AF have not been explored. This study investigated whether a differential conduction delay exists between the HRA and distal CS pacing in patients with paroxysmal AF but not in patients without AF. Nine patients with atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia utilizing a left accessory pathway undergoing catheter ablation were included in this study. Group 1 consisted of 5 patients with clinically documented paroxysmal AF and group 2 4 patients without a history of AF. The effective refractory periods (ERPs) of HRA, distal CS, and four different left atrial sites were determined. The interatrial conduction time and conduction delay between the HRA and distal CS during HRA or distal CS pacing were measured. The interatrial conduction delay (ICD) from the HRA to the distal CS during HRA pacing was significantly longer than that from the distal CS to the HRA during distal CS pacing in patients of group 1. However, the ICD from the HRA to the distal CS during HRA pacing was not significantly longer than that from the distal CS to the HRA during distal CS pacing in group 2 patients. A differential conduction delay between the HRA and the distal CS pacing is present in this specific population of patients with paroxysmal AF but not in patients without AF. The shorter conduction delay during DCS pacing may contribute to the prevention of induction of AF.