PURPOSE: This study was conducted to investigate the degree of fibrosis in atrial appendages of patients with and without atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing cardiac surgery. In addition, we hypothesized that areas of atrial fibrosis can be identified by electrogram fractionation and low voltage for potential ablation therapy. METHODS: Interstitial fibrosis from right (RAA) and/or left atrial appendages (LAA) was studied in patients with sinus rhythm (SR, n = 8), paroxysmal (n = 21), and persistent AF (n = 20) undergoing coronary artery bypass and/or aortic or mitral valve surgery. Atrial fibrosis quantification was performed with Masson trichrome staining. Intraoperative bipolar epicardial electrophysiological measurements were performed to correlate fibrosis to electrogram fractionation, voltage, and AF cycle length. RESULTS: The average degree of fibrosis was 11.2 ± 7.2 % in the LAA and 22.8 ± 7.6 % in the RAA (p < 0.001). Fibrosis was not significantly higher in paroxysmal AF patients compared to SR subjects (18.2 ± 8.7 versus 20.7 ± 5.3 %). Persistent AF patients had a higher degree of LAA and RAA fibrosis compared to paroxysmal AF patients (LAA 14.6 ± 8.7 versus 8.6 ± 4.7 %, p = 0.02, and RAA 28.2 ± 7.9 versus 18.2 ± 8.7 %, respectively, p = 0.04). The left atrial end diastolic volume index was higher in persistent AF patients compared to SR controls (38.3 ± 16.4 and 28 ± 11 ml/m(2), respectively, p = 0.04). No correlation between atrial fibrosis and electrogram fractionation or voltage was found. CONCLUSION: Patients with structural heart disease undergoing cardiac surgery have more fibrosis in the RAA than in the LAA. Furthermore, RAA fibrosis is increased in persistent AF but not paroxysmal AF patients compared to control subjects. Electrogram fractionation and low voltage did not provide accurate identification of the fibrotic substrate.
PURPOSE: This study was conducted to investigate the degree of fibrosis in atrial appendages of patients with and without atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing cardiac surgery. In addition, we hypothesized that areas of atrial fibrosis can be identified by electrogram fractionation and low voltage for potential ablation therapy. METHODS: Interstitial fibrosis from right (RAA) and/or left atrial appendages (LAA) was studied in patients with sinus rhythm (SR, n = 8), paroxysmal (n = 21), and persistent AF (n = 20) undergoing coronary artery bypass and/or aortic or mitral valve surgery. Atrial fibrosis quantification was performed with Masson trichrome staining. Intraoperative bipolar epicardial electrophysiological measurements were performed to correlate fibrosis to electrogram fractionation, voltage, and AF cycle length. RESULTS: The average degree of fibrosis was 11.2 ± 7.2 % in the LAA and 22.8 ± 7.6 % in the RAA (p < 0.001). Fibrosis was not significantly higher in paroxysmal AFpatients compared to SR subjects (18.2 ± 8.7 versus 20.7 ± 5.3 %). Persistent AFpatients had a higher degree of LAA and RAA fibrosis compared to paroxysmal AFpatients (LAA 14.6 ± 8.7 versus 8.6 ± 4.7 %, p = 0.02, and RAA 28.2 ± 7.9 versus 18.2 ± 8.7 %, respectively, p = 0.04). The left atrial end diastolic volume index was higher in persistent AFpatients compared to SR controls (38.3 ± 16.4 and 28 ± 11 ml/m(2), respectively, p = 0.04). No correlation between atrial fibrosis and electrogram fractionation or voltage was found. CONCLUSION:Patients with structural heart disease undergoing cardiac surgery have more fibrosis in the RAA than in the LAA. Furthermore, RAA fibrosis is increased in persistent AF but not paroxysmal AFpatients compared to control subjects. Electrogram fractionation and low voltage did not provide accurate identification of the fibrotic substrate.
Authors: A Goette; T Staack; C Röcken; M Arndt; J C Geller; C Huth; S Ansorge; H U Klein; U Lendeckel Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Marcos Daccarett; Troy J Badger; Nazem Akoum; Nathan S Burgon; Christian Mahnkopf; Gaston Vergara; Eugene Kholmovski; Christopher J McGann; Dennis Parker; Johannes Brachmann; Rob S Macleod; Nassir F Marrouche Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-02-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Michael F Swartz; Gregory W Fink; Charles J Lutz; Steven M Taffet; Omer Berenfeld; Karen L Vikstrom; Kimberly Kasprowicz; Luna Bhatta; Ferenc Puskas; Jérôme Kalifa; José Jalife Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2009-06-17 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: S Genovesi; P Fabbrini; F Pieruzzi; E Galbiati; E Sironi; D Pogliani; G Bonforte; M R Viganò; A Stella Journal: J Nephrol Date: 2014-08-14 Impact factor: 3.902
Authors: Niels Voigt; Jordi Heijman; Qiongling Wang; David Y Chiang; Na Li; Matthias Karck; Xander H T Wehrens; Stanley Nattel; Dobromir Dobrev Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-11-18 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Natalia Smorodinova; Martin Bláha; Vojtěch Melenovský; Karolína Rozsívalová; Jaromír Přidal; Mária Ďurišová; Jan Pirk; Josef Kautzner; Tomáš Kučera Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Tatyana V Sukhacheva; Natalia V Nizyaeva; Maria V Samsonova; Andrey L Cherniaev; Artem A Burov; Mariia V Iurova; Aleksandr I Shchegolev; Roman A Serov; Gennady T Sukhikh Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Kennedy S Ramos; Lisa Pool; Mathijs S van Schie; Leonoor F J M Wijdeveld; Willemijn F B van der Does; Luciënne Baks; H M Danish Sultan; Stan W van Wijk; Ad J J C Bogers; Sander Verheule; Natasja M S de Groot; Bianca J J M Brundel Journal: Cells Date: 2022-01-26 Impact factor: 6.600