Atrial Myocardial Deformation Properties Predict Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm After External Cardioversion of Recent-Onset Lone Atrial Fibrillation: A Color Doppler Myocardial Imaging and Transthoracic and Transesophageal Echocardiographic Study

Background—Accurate echocardiographic parameters to predict maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are poorly defined. This study was conducted to assess the atrial myocardial properties during AF through myocardial velocity, strain rate, and strain and to compare their prognostic value in maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with lone AF with standard transthoracic (TTE) and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Methods and Results—Sixty-five consecutive patients with lone AF for ≤3 months underwent TTE, TEE, and myocardial velocity and strain and strain rate imaging examinations before successful external cardioversion. Maintenance of sinus rhythm was assessed during a 9-month follow-up. Atrial myocardial velocity, strain, and strain rate values in AF patients were compared with those of age- and sex-matched referents. Moreover, clinical and echocardiographic parameters of patients with maintenance of sinus rhythm (MSR patients) over the 9-month follow-up period (n=25) were compared with those from patients with AF recurrence (AFR patients; n=40). Atrial myocardial properties assessed by myocardial velocity, strain rate, and strain were significantly reduced (P<0.0001) in patients (velocity, 3.2±1.4 cm/s; strain, 23.3±19%; strain rate, 2±0.9 seconds−1) compared with referents (velocity, 5.7±1.3 cm/s; strain, 92±26%; strain rate, 4.2±1.8 seconds−1). The individual predictors of sinus rhythm maintenance were atrial appendage flow velocity (MSR patients, 39±12 cm/s; AFR patients, 32±15 cm/s; P<0.01) assessed by TEE and atrial strain (MSR patients, 33±27%; AFR patients, 17±9%; P=0.0007) and strain rate (MSR patients, 2.7±1 seconds−1; AFR patients, 1.6±0.6 seconds−1; P<0.0001) peak systolic values. Atrial strain (P<0.0001; coefficient, 0.015; SE, 0.003) and strain rate (P<0.0001; coefficient, 0.372; SE, 0.075) parameters alone were confirmed as independent predictors of sinus rhythm maintenance by multivariable analysis. Conclusions—Patients with higher atrial strain and strain rate appear to have a greater likelihood of staying in sinus rhythm. If the current data are verified in future studies, then additional pharmacological therapy and maintenance of anticoagulants for a longer period may need to be considered in those with lower atrial strain and strain rate measurements.

[1]  G. Sutherland,et al.  Doppler Myocardial Imaging: A Textbook , 2006 .

[2]  M. Allessie,et al.  Loss of atrial contractility is primary cause of atrial dilatation during first days of atrial fibrillation. , 2004, American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology.

[3]  G. Sutherland,et al.  Late post-repair ventricular function in patients with origin of the left main coronary artery from the pulmonary trunk. , 2004, The American journal of cardiology.

[4]  G. Sutherland,et al.  Left atrial function assessment - what might tissue Doppler add ? , 2004 .

[5]  P. Claus,et al.  A comparative assessment of right and left atrial function in healthy subjects using strain/strain rate imaging , 2004 .

[6]  R. McNamara,et al.  Management of Atrial Fibrillation: Review of the Evidence for the Role of Pharmacologic Therapy, Electrical Cardioversion, and Echocardiography , 2003, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[7]  Julia C. Swanson,et al.  Strain rate acceleration yields a better index for evaluating left ventricular contractile function as compared with tissue velocity acceleration during isovolumic contraction time: an in vivo study. , 2003, Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography.

[8]  C. Asher,et al.  The role of echocardiography in atrial fibrillation and cardioversion , 2003, Heart.

[9]  I. Hashimoto,et al.  Myocardial strain rate is a superior method for evaluation of left ventricular subendocardial function compared with tissue Doppler imaging. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  D. Ross,et al.  Changes in regional left atrial function with aging: evaluation by Doppler tissue imaging. , 2003, European journal of echocardiography : the journal of the Working Group on Echocardiography of the European Society of Cardiology.

[11]  T. Abraham,et al.  Strain and strain rate echocardiography , 2002, Current opinion in cardiology.

[12]  G. Sutherland,et al.  Can changes in systolic longitudinal deformation quantify regional myocardial function after an acute infarction? An ultrasonic strain rate and strain study. , 2002, Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography.

[13]  N. Peters,et al.  Atrial fibrillation: strategies to control, combat, and cure , 2002, The Lancet.

[14]  P Suetens,et al.  Regional strain and strain rate measurements by cardiac ultrasound: principles, implementation and limitations. , 2000, European journal of echocardiography : the journal of the Working Group on Echocardiography of the European Society of Cardiology.

[15]  G R Sutherland,et al.  Regional myocardial function--a new approach. , 2000, European heart journal.

[16]  A. Mattioli,et al.  Serial evaluation of left atrial dimension after cardioversion for atrial fibrillation and relation to atrial function. , 2000, The American journal of cardiology.

[17]  John Calvin Reed,et al.  Myocardial cell death in fibrillating and dilated human right atria. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[18]  P. Giannuzzi,et al.  Estimation of pulmonary wedge pressure by transmitral Doppler in patients with chronic heart failure and atrial fibrillation. , 1999, The American journal of cardiology.

[19]  W. Manning,et al.  Role of echocardiography in patients undergoing elective cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. , 1998, Circulation.

[20]  B. Hoit,et al.  Left atrial systolic and diastolic function accompanying chronic rapid pacing-induced atrial failure. , 1998, The American journal of physiology.

[21]  M. Allessie,et al.  Structural changes of atrial myocardium due to sustained atrial fibrillation in the goat. , 1997, Circulation.

[22]  A. Castaigne,et al.  Is left atrial appendage flow a predictor for outcome of cardioversion of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation? A transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiographic study , 1997 .

[23]  M. Allessie,et al.  Dedifferentiation of atrial cardiomyocytes as a result of chronic atrial fibrillation. , 1997, The American journal of pathology.

[24]  O. Kamp,et al.  Transesophageal echocardiographic predictors for maintenance of sinus rhythm after electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. , 1997, The American journal of cardiology.

[25]  Nitin R. Patel,et al.  Exact logistic regression: theory and examples. , 1995, Statistics in medicine.

[26]  M. Allessie,et al.  Atrial fibrillation begets atrial fibrillation. A study in awake chronically instrumented goats. , 1995, Circulation.

[27]  D G Gibson,et al.  Architecture of atrial musculature in humans. , 1995, British heart journal.

[28]  P. Barbier,et al.  Left Atrial Function and Ventricular Filling in Hypertensive Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation , 1994, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[29]  I. V. Van Gelder,et al.  Serial antiarrhythmic drug treatment to maintain sinus rhythm after electrical cardioversion for chronic atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter. , 1991, The American journal of cardiology.

[30]  M. Brodsky,et al.  Factors determining maintenance of sinus rhythm after chronic atrial fibrillation with left atrial dilatation. , 1989, The American journal of cardiology.

[31]  T. Savides,et al.  Echocardiographic and clinical predictors for outcome of elective cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. , 1989, The American journal of cardiology.

[32]  D. Roy,et al.  Doppler echocardiographic predictors of recurrence of atrial fibrillation after cardioversion. , 1988, The American journal of cardiology.

[33]  M. Boutjdir,et al.  Inhomogeneity of Cellular Refractoriness in Human Atrium: Factor of Arrhythmia? , 1986, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[34]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[35]  A. DeMaria,et al.  Recommendations Regarding Quantitation in M-Mode Echocardiography: Results of a Survey of Echocardiographic Measurements , 1978, Circulation.

[36]  Sinclair-Smith Bc,et al.  Electrical Reversion of Cardiac Arrhythmias , 1972, Southern medical journal.

[37]  W. Garrey THE NATURE OF FIBRILLARY CONTRACTION OF THE HEART. ‐ ITS RELATION TO TISSUE MASS AND FORM 1 , 1914 .