肥厚型心肌病患者心房颤动导管消融有效性研究

目的 评价心房颤动(房颤)导管消融在肥厚型心肌病(HCM)患者中的有效性.方法 连续入选25例HCM合并房颤行导管消融的患者作为病例组.1∶2匹配人选50例同期行导管消 融且年龄、性别、房颤类型、房颤病程匹配的不伴HCM的房颤患者作为对照组.结果 病例组24例患者和对照组47例患者完成随访.病例组左心房内径明显大于对照组(47.6±7.6)mm对(40.5±8.2)mm(P=0.001).病例组房颤相关症状欧洲心律学会(European heart rhythm association,EHRA)评分为3.0±0.7,对照组为2.5±0.7,P=0.008.单次消融术后平均随访(3.1±1.0)年,病例组复发率显著高于对照组(66.7％对42.6％,P=0.004).平均(1.2±0.5)次手术后,随访(2.9±1.2)年,窦性心律维持率在病例组为12/24(50％),对照组为33/47(70.2％,P=0.003).成功维持窦性心律的HCM患者心功能(NY-HA分级)显著降低(1.4±0.5对1.1±0.3,P=0.04).Cox多因素分析显示HCM和左心房内径是复发的独立危险因素(HCM:HR2.5,95％CI 1.06～5.80,P=0.037；左心房内径:HR 1.1,95％CI 1.01～1.10,P=0.009).结论 HCM合并房颤患者,房颤相关症状更显著,导管消融成功率相对低,消融成功的患者心功能改善明显.复发机制可能不仅与其介导了左心房增大相关.     

右心房大小预测阵发性心房颤动合并左心房增大导管射频消融术后的复发

目的:左心房大小可以预测心房颤动(房颤)导管射频消融术后的复发。本研究旨在探讨右心房大小是否可以预测房颤射频消融术后复发。方法:纳入2009-01-2011-12在北京安贞医院行导管射频消融术的阵发性房颤患者共196例。阵发性房颤的消融策略为双侧环肺静脉隔离(PVI)。术后以常规心电图和动态心电图随访患者心律失常复发情况。运用回归分析方法甄别与心律失常复发相关的危险因素并检测其预测效力。结果:术后随访(25.3±18.1)个月,共有111例消融术后复发。右心房横径(RAD)和左心房内径(LAD,r=0.285,P0.001),左心室射血分数(r=-0.241,P=0.001)和左心室舒张末期内径(r=0.239,P=0.001)有关。多因素Cox回归分析显示RAD可以独立预测房颤合并LAD增大患者术后复发(HR 1.044,95%CI1.007~1.082,P=0.021)。其中RAD的截断值为35.5 mm时的预测敏感性为85.4%,特异性为29.2%。KaplanMeier分析两组的窦性心律维持率有显著性差别(Log Rank P=0.034)。结论:右心房增大可以独立预测阵发性房颤合并左心房增大患者的房颤术后远期复发。推测双心房参与房颤的发生与维持。     

碎裂QRS波预测肥厚型心肌病合并心房颤动患者射频消融术后心律失常复发的探讨

目的:探讨碎裂QRS波(f QRS)与肥厚型心肌病(HCM)合并心房颤动患者导管消融术后的复发是否有关。方法:纳入在北京安贞医院行导管消融术的HCM合并心房颤动患者共91例(阵发/持续性心房颤动:60/31)。消融策略包括:阵发性心房颤动患者行双侧肺静脉隔离(PVI);持续性心房颤动患者行PVI加左心房顶、二尖瓣峡部和三尖瓣峡部线性消融。术前评估基线心电图,fQRS定义为常规12导联心电图中至少2个连续导联的QRS波存在≥2个R波或者R波的波顶或S波的波谷出现顿挫波。术后定期随访,复发定义为导管消融术后心电图或动态心电图记录的任何类型的30s的房性快速性心律失常。结果 68.1%(62/91)患者fQRS阳性。fQRS最常见于下壁导联(75.8%)。平均随访18个月,窦性心律维持率为54.2%(59/91),74.6%(44/59)复发发生在1年以内。fQRS阳性组复发率高于fQRS阴性组(79.0%vs.34.5%,P0.001)。多因素Cox回归分析表明,fQRS是术后快速房性心律失常复发的危险因素(HR=3.243,95%CI:1.147~9.167,P=0.026)。结论:fQRS是HCM合并心房颤动患者导管消融术后房性心律失常复发的预测因子,可用于预测该类患者心房颤动射频术后转归。     

肥厚型心肌病合并心房颤动患者射频消融术后心律失常复发心电指标的预测

目的:探讨心电指标f QRS与QTc联合是否能更好预测肥厚型心肌病(HCM)合并心房颤动患者导管消融术后的复发。方法:纳入在北京安贞医院行导管消融术的HCM合并心房颤动患者共120例(阵发/持续性心房颤动72/48)。消融策略包括:阵发性心房颤动患者行双侧肺静脉隔离(PVI);持续性心房颤动患者行PVI加左心房顶、二尖瓣峡部和三尖瓣峡部线性消融。术前评估基线心电图,f QRS定义为常规12导联心电图中至少两个连续导联的QRS波存在≥2个R波或者R波的波顶或S波的波谷出现顿挫波。采用Bazett公式校正QT间期。术后定期随访,复发定义为导管消融术后心电图或动态心电图记录的任何类型的>30 s的房性快速性心律失常。结果:59.2%(71/120)患者f QRR阳性。f QRS最常见于下壁导联(81.7%)。QTc间期(443.90±38.59)ms。平均随访13.4个月,窦性心律维持率为42.5%。多因素Cox回归分析表明,f QRS阳性(HR=1.922,95%CI:1.151~3.210,P=0.012)和QTc>448 ms(HR=1.982,95%CI 1.155~3.402,P=0.013)分别是术后复发的危险因素。f QRS和QTc联合能更好预测心房颤动术后复发。结论:f QRS和QTc延长是HCM合并心房颤动患者导管消融术后复发的独立预测因素。f QRS和QTc联合可用于预测该类患者心房颤动射频术后转归。     

右心房大小不能预测持续性心房颤动导管射频消融术后的复发

目的:本研究旨在探讨右心房横径(RAD)是否可以预测持续性心房颤动射频消融术后复发。方法:纳入2009年1月至2011年12月,在北京安贞医院行导管射频消融术的持续性心房颤动患者共274例。消融策略为双侧环肺静脉隔离(PVI)基础上加行左心房顶部、二尖瓣峡部和三尖瓣峡部线性消融。术后以常规心电图和动态心电图随访患者心律失常复发情况。运用回归分析方法甄别与心律失常复发相关的危险因素并检测其预测效力。结果:术后随访平均24个月,共有174例消融术后复发。与未复发组相比,复发组左心房内径(LAD)显著性增大[(44.6±5.4)vs.(42.8±5.8)mm;P=0.009],但是两组的RAD差异无统计学意义,[(43.5±5.6)vs.(43.7±6.1)mm;P=0.796)。单因素Cox回归分析显示女性(HR=0.475,95%CI:0.260~0.867,P=0.015)﹑体质量指数(HR=1.063,95%CI:0.988~1.143,P=0.100)和LAD(HR=1.064,95%CI:1.015~1.115,P=0.010)是心房颤动术后复发的危险因素,而RAD不是心房颤动术后复发的危险因素。多因素Cox回归分析显示LAD(HR=1.053,95%CI:1.000~1.109,P=0.050)和女性(HR=0.418,95%CI:0.213~0.819,P=0.011)可以独立预测心房颤动消融术后复发。结论:右心房大小不能独立预测持续性心房颤动消融术后复发,推测有其他潜在的机制参与此类心房颤动的发生与维持。     

左心房黏液瘤术后新发房性心律失常的患者行导管消融的有效性与安全性初探

目的初步探讨左心房黏液瘤外科术后新发房性心律失常的患者接受导管消融的安全性与有效性。方法回顾性选取北京安贞医院2014年9月至2019年11月左心房黏液瘤术后新发房性心律失常并接受导管消融治疗的患者9例。收集患者的基线临床数据、消融术中参数和围术期严重不良事件,并随访导管消融术后心律失常复发情况和临床预后,采用Kaplan-Meier生存曲线分析导管消融术后窦性心律维持率。结果9例患者年龄(55.8±9.1)岁,男性3例(3/9),阵发性心房颤动(房颤)3例(3/9),心房扑动(房扑)或房性心动过速(房速)6例(6/9)。所有患者均成功完成导管消融治疗,围术期均未发生卒中、心包积液、心脏压塞、血管并发症及大出血事件。随访40.0(27.5,55.5)个月,9例患者中有6例(6/9)初次消融术后维持窦性心律,总体窦性心律维持比例为2/3。3例房颤患者中有1例(1/3)出现早期房颤复发(术后3个月),6例房速或房扑患者中有2例(2/6)房扑患者出现极晚期新发房颤和/或复发房扑(分别为术后19、29个月)。3例复发患者中有2例接受再次消融,其中1例维持窦性心律。所有患者随访期间未复发黏液瘤,未发生死亡、卒中、急性心肌梗死等事件。结论左心房黏液瘤外科术后新发房性心律失常患者接受导管消融安全、有效,可以作为一项治疗选择。     

典型心房扑动对心房颤动导管消融复发的影响

目的 评价典型心房扑动(房扑)对心房颤动(房颤)导管消融复发的影响.方法 120例药物治疗无效的阵发性房颤患者在三维电解剖标测系统和肺静脉环状标测电极导管联合指导下行环肺静脉电隔离.其中17例(14.2%)合并典型房扑(房扑组,其余作为对照组),行三尖瓣环峡部消融,三尖瓣环峡部消融终点为三尖瓣环峡部双向阻滞.房颤复发定义为导管消融3个月后发生房性快速心律失常.结果 房扑组房颤病程(9.8±10.7)年,长于对照组(5.9±6.3)年,差异有统计学意义(P=0.036).房扑组与对照组相比,年龄、性别、合并器质性心脏病、左心房直径、左心室射血分数差异无统计学意义.随访91～401(237±79)d,房扑组房颤复发率为47.1%,对照组房颤复发率为12.6%,两组间差异有统计学意义(P=0.001).经校正年龄、房颤病程、合并器质性心脏病、左心房直径等因素,Cox多因素分析发现消融术前合并房扑是房颤复发的独立危险因素(危险比3.52,95%可信区间1.32～9.34,P=0.012).结论 典型房扑可能增加房颤导管消融术后房颤的复发,房颤导管消融前应对患者是否合并典型房扑进行认真评价.     

校正的QT间期延长独立预测肥厚型心肌病合并心房颤动患者导管消融术后复发

目的探讨校正的QT间期(QTc)延长和炎症的相关性,以及肥厚型心肌病(HCM)合并心房颤动(简称房颤)导管射频消融术后复发的影响因素。方法回顾性分析在北京安贞医院行导管射频消融术的HCM合并房颤患者。收集术前心电图、经胸超声心动图等其他临床资料,术后定期随访术后复发。采用免疫比浊法检测C反应蛋白(CRP)。采用Bazett公式校正QT间期。复发定义为消融后3个月停用抗心律失常药物后快速房性心律失常发作。结果共入选72例,随访(8.2±4.1)个月,35例房颤消融术后复发(复发率48.61%)。与未复发组相比,复发组的QTc显著延长、中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比值(NLR)显著升高。QTc延长与CRP(r=0.355,P=0.004)、NLR(r=0.331,P=0.004)显著相关。单因素分析显示QTc、NLR与房颤术后复发有关。多因素Cox回归分析显示QTc延长是房颤术后复发的独立危险因素。其中,当QTc截断值为447ms时,其预测房颤复发的灵敏度为80%,特异度为62.6%。结论 QTc延长可能与高炎症负荷有关,QTc延长独立预测HCM合并房颤患者导管消融术后复发。     

导管消融与药物治疗对肥厚型心肌病合并心房颤动患者心血管原因住院率的影响

目的探讨导管消融与药物治疗对肥厚型心肌病(hypertrophic cardiomyopathy,HCM)合并心房颤动(房颤)患者心血管原因住院率的影响。方法连续入选2004年6月至2015年3月于首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院等7家医院首次接受导管消融治疗的48例HCM合并房颤患者作为导管消融组,纳入同期仅接受药物治疗的78例HCM合并房颤患者作为药物治疗组。随访观察患者房颤复发及心血管原因住院情况。结果导管消融组48例患者均顺利完成房颤导管消融,单次术后平均随访(17.6±8.4)个月,16例(33.3%)复发房颤,32例(66.7%)维持窦性心律;药物治疗组平均随访(10.7±8.0)个月,31例(39.7%)转复为窦性心律;导管消融组患者窦性心律维持率显著高于药物治疗组,差异有统计学意义(P=0.003)。与药物治疗组相比,导管消融组的非计划性心血管原因住院率显著降低[2例(4.2%)比17例(21.8%),P=0.001]。Cox多因素分析显示,房颤治疗策略(导管消融/药物治疗,HR 9.082,95%CI 1.130~73.011,P=0.038)和既往心力衰竭史(HR 2.860,95%CI 1.072~7.633,P=0.036)是非计划性心血管原因住院的独立危险因素。结论 HCM合并房颤组患者导管消融治疗的窦性心律维持率及非计划性心血管原因住院率均优于药物治疗组患者,房颤治疗策略和既往心力衰竭史是非计划性心血管原因住院的独立危险因素。     

QTc延长预测肥厚型心肌病合并心房颤动患者导管消融术后的复发

目的:探讨肥厚型心肌病(hypertrophic cardiomyopathy,HCM)合并心房颤动患者的QTc是否与心房颤动导管射频消融术后复发相关。方法:回顾性分析2006年11月至2013年6月,在北京安贞医院第一次行导管射频消融术的HCM合并心房颤动患者共39例,收集术前心电图和其他临床资料,术后定期随访。结果:随访(14.8±11.7)个月,23例患者心房颤动消融术后复发(复发率59%)。与未复发组相比,复发组QTc显著性延长[(461±29)vs.(434±18)ms,P=0.001)]。多因素Logistic回归分析显示QTc和左心房前后径(LAD)是心房颤动复发的独立危险因素。其中,当QTc截断值为448ms时,其预测心房颤动复发的敏感性为0.81,特异性为0.78。多因素Cox回归分析表明QTc每增加10ms,心房颤动复发的风险比为1.227(95%CI:1.053~1.431,P=0.009)。与LAD单独预测术后复发相比,LAD和QTc联合能更好地预测心房颤动消融术后复发。短QTc和左心房偏小的患者无心房颤动复发。结论:QTc延长能预测HCM合并心房颤动患者导管消融术后复发。短QTc和左心房偏小的患者导管消融术后复发率低。     

心房颤动总是"引发"心房颤动吗?

心房颤动(AF)是临床上常见的心律失常,心房重构和AF"引发"AF概念的提出是对AF病理生理机制研究的重大进展,但临床上有关AF的诸多问题并不能都用AF"引发"AF和单纯的心房电重构来解释,本文就AF"引发"AF这一问题结合有关文献作一综述.     

New-onset atrial fibrillation

Patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation are often hospitalized emergently. To determine whether this is necessary, the authors retrospectively reviewed the care of 97 consecutive patients with this illness. No reason for the atrial fibrillation in 43 patients could be identified. Hypertension, coronary artery disease, and valvular heart disease were the most commonly associated conditions; myocardial infarction occurred in one patient. In 82% of patients, atrial fibrillation reverted to normal sinus rhythm during hospitalization. Three patients needed emergent hospitalization irrespective of the presence of atrial fibrillation. In the remainder, admission was based solely on the diagnosis of new-onset atrial fibrillation. Ninety-eight per cent had an uncomplicated hospital course. It is concluded that hospitalization is not necessary for all patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation. Those in whom reversion to normal sinus rhythm occurs rapidly during digoxin therapy can be discharged. Where no major medical illness is evident patients can be admitted to a bed outside the intensive care unit until reversion to normal sinus rhythm or rate control is achieved. Received from the Department of Medicine, North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, New York, and the Departments of Medicine and Pharmacology, Cornell University Medical College, New York, New York. Supported in part by a grant from the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association Foundation.     

Cardioversion in atrial fibrillation. Focus on recent-onset atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation is the most common sustained arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. Its prevalence is rising due to an increasing elderly population and the improvement in management of life-threatening diseases such as myocardial infarction and heart failure. Over the past few years effective non-pharmacological treatments, new antiarrhythmics drugs, and anticoagulants have been introduced. Regardless of rate-control or rhythm control strategy, adequate stroke prevention still remains a cornerstone in the treatment of this arrhythmia. This review aims to illustrate the main practical issues in the management of atrial fibrillation, focusing on patients with recent-onset and hemodynamically stable atrial fibrillation.     

Deglutition-induced atrial fibrillation

We present the case of 38-year-old woman who experienced palpitations on swallowing, which were later found to be atrial fibrillation. Her symptoms improved on treatment with disopyramide and verapamil. Within 9 months, she was weaned from both medications without recurrence of symptoms.     

Postoperative atrial fibrillation

Postoperative atrial fibrillation is associated with significant morbidity, longer hospital stay, and higher related costs. Although the etiologic mechanism of postoperative atrial fibrillation and its optimum method of prophylaxis or management are not well defined, progress has been made during the past decade. This review focused on recent findings leading to a better understanding of the mechanisms and management of atrial fibrillation after surgery and current approaches directed at prevention of thromboembolic sequelae. Because postoperative atrial fibrillation is a frequent complication, preoperative risk assessment algorithms are being proposed to minimize the number of patients in whom an intervention to prevent atrial fibrillation is undertaken, and thus, reduce toxicity due to antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Finally, current data suggest that once atrial fibrillation has occurred, a rate-control strategy during the first 8 to 12 hours is reasonable because 50% of those episodes will resolve during this period. Beyond this period, a more aggressive approach using class IC or III antiarrhythmic drugs will hopefully reduce the number of patients requiring anticoagulation and prolonged drug therapy.     

Drug-induced atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained rhythm disorder observed in clinical practice and predominantly associated with cardiovascular disorders such as coronary heart disease and hypertension. However, several classes of drugs may induce AF in patients without apparent heart disease or may precipitate the onset of AF in patients with preexisting heart disease. We reviewed the literature on drug-induced AF, using the PubMed/Medline and Micromedex databases and lateral references. Successively, we discuss the potential role in the onset of AF of cardiovascular drugs, respiratory system drugs, cytostatics, central nervous system drugs, genitourinary system drugs, and some miscellaneous agents. Drug-induced AF may play a role in only a minority of the patients presenting with AF. Nevertheless, it is important to recognize drugs or other agents as a potential cause, especially in the elderly, because increasing age is associated with multiple drug use and a high incidence of AF. This may contribute to timely diagnosis and management of drug-induced AF.