| Literature DB >> 26229966 |
P J Howlett1, F S Hatch1, V Alexeenko1, R I Jabr1, E W Leatham2, C H Fry3.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the commonest sustained arrhythmia globally and results in significantly increased morbidity and mortality including a fivefold risk of stroke. Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) constitutes approximately half of all AF cases and is thought to represent an early stage of the disease. This intermittent form of atrial arrhythmia can be a challenge to identify and as a result many affected individuals are not prescribed appropriate antithrombotic therapy and hence are at risk of stroke and thromboembolism. Despite these adverse outcomes there have been relatively few diagnostic advances in the field since the introduction of the Holter monitor in 1949. This review aims to establish the available evidence for electrophysiological, molecular, and morphological biomarkers to improve the detection of PAF with reference to the underlying mechanisms for the condition.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26229966 PMCID: PMC4502272 DOI: 10.1155/2015/910267
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1An ECG recording from a continuous cardiac monitor from a patient suffering from paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) lasting for several hours. The arrow marks the onset of AF, characterised by a variable R-R interval (representing the time between two successive ventricular contractions) and loss of P-waves (absence of coordinated atrial activity) (unpublished).
Figure 2Illustrative diagram of a typical human left atrial AP with associated currents shown above (a). Electrical remodeling can result in abnormal APs (b). I CaL reactivation (blue) can cause early-after depolarization (EAD) that may result in repetitive EAD. Alternatively spontaneous ryanodine receptor (RYR) release or Na+/Ca2+ exchanger activation (NCX) (red) would result in delayed-after depolarization (DAD) (unpublished).
Figure 3Staining of the left atrial appendage demonstrating fibrosis stained with vimentin (green) in a patient in sinus rhythm (a) and AF (b) (unpublished).
Figure 4Thrombus visualized in the left atrial appendage is marked with an arrow (unpublished).
Figure 5An example of an atrial premature beat is marked (unpublished).
Figure 6Measurement of left atrial velocity using tissue Doppler. The left image demonstrates the position of the probe at the lateral mitral annulus. The right image represents the velocities generated during diastole with the atrial component (termed a′) marked (unpublished).
A summary of the main advantages and disadvantages of current diagnostic techniques for PAF (not bold) including potential biomarkers for PAF based on the evidence detailed in this review (bold) (unpublished).
| Diagnostic class | Technique | Sensitivity | Specificity | Automated analysis | Remote analysis | Cost | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECG rhythm monitoring | Continuous long-term ECG monitoring using implantable devices | High | High | + | + | High | High sensitivity and specificity | Costly, invasive equipment required |
| Medium-term noninvasive ECG monitoring >24 hours | Moderate | High | +/− | +/− | Moderate | Moderate sensitivity and specificity | Patient inconvenience, some cases missed | |
| Short-term ECG monitoring -24 hours | Low | High | +/− | +/− | Low to moderate | Relatively inexpensive | Low diagnostic yield | |
|
| ||||||||
| Electrophysiological Biomarkers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||||
| Molecular biomarkers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Morphological biomarkers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |