Literature DB >> 11469446

Classification of atrial flutter and regular atrial tachycardia according to electrophysiologic mechanism and anatomic bases: a statement from a joint expert group from the Working Group of Arrhythmias of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology.

N Saoudi1, F Cosio, A Waldo, S A Chen, Y Iesaka, M Lesh, S Saksena, J Salerno, W Schoels.   

Abstract

Regular atrial tachycardias classically are classified into flutter or tachycardia, depending on the rate and presence of a stable baseline on the ECG. However, current understanding of electrophysiology atrial tachycardias makes this classification obsolete, because it does not correlate with mechanisms. The proposed classification is based on electrophysiologic mechanisms, defined by mapping and entrainment. Radiofrequency ablation of a critical focus or isthmus can afford proof. Focal tachycardias are characterized by radial spread of activation and endocardial activation not covering the whole cycle. Ablation of the focus of origin interrupts the tachycardia. The mechanism of focal firing is difficult to ascertain by clinical methods. Macroreentrant tachycardias are characterized by circular patterns of activation that cover the whole cycle. Fusion can be shown during entrainment on the ECG or by multiple endocardial recordings. Ablation of a critical isthmus interrupts the tachycardia. Macroreentry can occur around normal structures (terminal crest, eustachian ridge) or around atrial lesions. The anatomic bases of these tachycardias must be defined, to guide appropriate treatment. Atrial flutter is a mere description of continuous undulation on the ECG, and only some strictly defined typical flutter patterns correlate with right atrial macroreentry bounded by the tricuspid valve, terminal crest, and caval vein orifices. This classification should be considered open, as some classically described tachycardias, such as reentrant sinus tachycardia, inappropriate sinus tachycardia, and type II atrial flutter, cannot be classified accurately. Furthermore, the possibility of fibrillatory conduction makes the limits with atrial fibrillation still ill defined.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11469446     DOI: 10.1046/j.1540-8167.2001.00852.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol        ISSN: 1045-3873


  29 in total

Review 1.  Which patient should be referred to an electrophysiologist: supraventricular tachycardia.

Authors:  Richard J Schilling
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.994

2.  What is the best endpoint for ablating atrial flutter?

Authors:  D E Krummen; S M Narayan
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 1.900

3.  Mechanisms of atypical flutter wave morphology in patients with isthmus-dependent atrial flutter.

Authors:  Su-Hua Yan; Wen-Juan Cheng; Le-Xin Wang; Ming-You Chen; He-Sheng Hu; Mei Xue
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2009-05-24       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 4.  Standardized review of atrial anatomy for cardiac electrophysiologists.

Authors:  Damián Sánchez-Quintana; Gonzalo Pizarro; José Ramón López-Mínguez; Siew Yen Ho; José Angel Cabrera
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2013-02-07       Impact factor: 4.132

5.  Accurate ECG diagnosis of atrial tachyarrhythmias using quantitative analysis: a prospective diagnostic and cost-effectiveness study.

Authors:  David E Krummen; Mitul Patel; Hong Nguyen; Gordon Ho; Dhruv S Kazi; Paul Clopton; Marian C Holland; Scott L Greenberg; Gregory K Feld; Mitchell N Faddis; Sanjiv M Narayan
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2010-11

6.  2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society.

Authors:  Craig T January; L Samuel Wann; Joseph S Alpert; Hugh Calkins; Joaquin E Cigarroa; Joseph C Cleveland; Jamie B Conti; Patrick T Ellinor; Michael D Ezekowitz; Michael E Field; Katherine T Murray; Ralph L Sacco; William G Stevenson; Patrick J Tchou; Cynthia M Tracy; Clyde W Yancy
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Randomized controlled trial of Amigo® robotically controlled versus manually controlled ablation of the cavo-tricuspid isthmus using a contact force ablation catheter.

Authors:  Kurt S Hoffmayer; Felix Krainski; Sanjay Shah; Jessica Hunter; Maylene Alegre; Jonathan C Hsu; Gregory K Feld
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2018-02-12       Impact factor: 1.900

8.  Localized reentry within the left atrial appendage: arrhythmogenic role in patients undergoing ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Mélèze Hocini; Ashok J Shah; Isabelle Nault; Prashanthan Sanders; Matthew Wright; Sanjiv M Narayan; Yoshihide Takahashi; Pierre Jaïs; Seiichiro Matsuo; Sébastien Knecht; Frédéric Sacher; Kang-Teng Lim; Jacques Clémenty; Michel Haïssaguerre
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2011-07-12       Impact factor: 6.343

9.  Atrial tachycardias arising from ablation of atrial fibrillation: a proarrhythmic bump or an antiarrhythmic turn?

Authors:  Ashok J Shah; Amir Jadidi; Xingpeng Liu; Shinsuke Miyazaki; Andrei Forclaz; Isabelle Nault; Lena Rivard; Nick Linton; Olivier Xhaet; Nicolas Derval; Frederic Sacher; Pierre Bordachar; Philippe Ritter; Meleze Hocini; Pierre Jais; Michel Haissaguerre
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2010-04-07       Impact factor: 1.866

10.  Impact of a 4q25 genetic variant in atrial flutter and on the risk of atrial fibrillation after cavotricuspid isthmus ablation.

Authors:  Jason D Roberts; Jonathan C Hsu; Bradley E Aouizerat; Clive R Pullinger; Mary J Malloy; John P Kane; Jeffrey E Olgin; Gregory M Marcus
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2013-12-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.