Literature DB >> 26775143

The association of baseline left atrial structure and function measured with cardiac magnetic resonance and pulmonary vein isolation outcome in patients with drug-refractory atrial fibrillation.

Mohammadali Habibi1, Joao A C Lima2, Esra Gucuk Ipek2, Stefan L Zimmerman3, Vadim Zipunnikov4, David Spragg2, Hiroshi Ashikaga2, John Rickard2, Joseph E Marine2, Ronald D Berger2, Hugh Calkins2, Saman Nazarian5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prognostic significance of left atrial (LA) function in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is poorly defined.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of LA function measured with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) feature-tracking and AF recurrence following catheter ablation.
METHODS: One hundred and twenty-one AF patients (72% paroxysmal, mean age 59 ± 10 years) were enrolled. Baseline LA function was measured by calculating passive, active, and total emptying fractions (LAEF) and analysis of global longitudinal strain and strain rates. Patients were followed up for recurrence of AF or atrial tachycardia (AT). Hazard ratios for recurrence were calculated using Cox proportional models adjusted for potential clinical confounders, type of AF, left ventricular ejection fraction, AF duration, LA volume, and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE).
RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 18 ± 9 months, 52 patients (43%) experienced recurrent AF/AT. Patients with recurrent AF/AT had higher baseline LA volume index and lower LA passive, and total LAEF (P < .05 for all). The baseline peak LA strain and strain rates in all phases of LA function were lower in the AF/AT recurrence group (P < .01 for all). In multivariable analysis total LAEF, peak LA strain, and systolic and late diastolic strain rates were associated with recurrence. Both peak LA strain and total LAEF improved prediction of recurrent AT/AF compared to the baseline clinical model, including LA LGE (C statistic 0.82 vs 0.77, P < .05 for both total LAEF and peak LA strain).
CONCLUSIONS: LA reservoir function was independently associated with recurrent AF/AT after PVI and can additionally improve risk stratification in patients undergoing PVI.
Copyright © 2016 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiac MRI; Left atrial fibrosis; Left atrial function; Pulmonary vein isolation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26775143     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.01.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Rhythm        ISSN: 1547-5271            Impact factor:   6.343


  10 in total

1.  Intra-Atrial Dyssynchrony During Sinus Rhythm Predicts Recurrence After the First Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Luisa Ciuffo; Susumu Tao; Esra Gucuk Ipek; Tarek Zghaib; Muhammad Balouch; Joao A C Lima; Saman Nazarian; David D Spragg; Joseph E Marine; Ronald D Berger; Hugh Calkins; Hiroshi Ashikaga
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-01-17

2.  Left atrial evaluation by cardiovascular magnetic resonance: sensitive and unique biomarkers.

Authors:  Dana C Peters; Jérôme Lamy; Albert J Sinusas; Lauren A Baldassarre
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2021-12-18       Impact factor: 6.875

3.  Association between interatrial block, left atrial fibrosis, and mechanical dyssynchrony: Electrocardiography-magnetic resonance imaging correlation.

Authors:  Luisa Ciuffo; Vanesa Bruña; Manuel Martínez-Sellés; Henrique Doria de Vasconcellos; Susumu Tao; Tarek Zghaib; Saman Nazarian; David D Spragg; Joseph Marine; Ronald D Berger; Joao A C Lima; Hugh Calkins; Antonio Bayés-de-Luna; Hiroshi Ashikaga
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-06-15

Review 4.  Atrial Fibrillation Ablation in Patients with Heart Failure: One Size Does Not Fit All.

Authors:  Rahul K Mukherjee; Steven E Williams; Steven A Niederer; Mark D O'Neill
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2018-06

5.  Short- and long-term associations of atrial fibrillation catheter ablation with left atrial structure and function: A cardiac magnetic resonance study.

Authors:  Mohammadali Habibi; Joao A C Lima; Esra Gucuk Ipek; David Spragg; Hiroshi Ashikaga; Joseph E Marine; Ronald D Berger; Hugh Calkins; Saman Nazarian
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-12-29

6.  An echocardiographic model for predicting the recurrence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation after circumferential pulmonary vein ablation.

Authors:  Yuxia Miao; Min Xu; Chunxu Zhang; Huannian Liu; Xiaoliang Shao; Yuetao Wang; Junhua Yang
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 2.882

7.  Influence of Sex-Based Differences in Cardiac Phenotype on Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence in Patients Undergoing Pulmonary Vein Isolation.

Authors:  Alena Yakimenka; Dina Labib; Steven Dykstra; Yoko Mikami; Alessandro Satriano; Jacqueline Flewitt; Patricia Feuchter; Sandra Rivest; Andrew G Howarth; Carmen P Lydell; F Russell Quinn; Stephen B Wilton; James A White
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-07-28

Review 8.  Assessment of Left Atrial Structure and Function by Echocardiography in Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Mengmeng Ji; Lin He; Lang Gao; Yixia Lin; Mingxing Xie; Yuman Li
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-05

Review 9.  Clinical utility of left atrial strain in predicting atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation: An up-to-date review.

Authors:  Zhi-Xi Yu; Wen Yang; Wei-Si Yin; Ke-Xin Peng; Yi-Lin Pan; Wei-Wei Chen; Bei-Bei Du; Yu-Quan He; Ping Yang
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 1.534

10.  Association of Left Atrial Function Index With Late Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence after Catheter Ablation.

Authors:  Mayank Sardana; Adedotun A Ogunsua; Matthew Spring; Amir Shaikh; Owusu Asamoah; Glenn Stokken; Clifford Browning; Cynthia Ennis; J Kevin Donahue; Lawrence S Rosenthal; Kevin C Floyd; Gerard P Aurigemma; Nisha I Parikh; David D McManus
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2016-10-07       Impact factor: 2.942

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.