Background: Identification of good responders to rhythm control in the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) is worthwhile in terms of increasing hemodynamic benefit and decreasing the likelihood of unstable anticoagulation even after the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-Up Investigation of Rhythm Management. Methods: We tested the hypothesis that atrial substrate determines the risk of recurrence on rhythm control both in patients with paroxysmal AF (PAF) and in those with persistent or sustained AF (≧1 week, SAF). There were 90 consecutive patients (mean age 63 ± 12 years, 67 males and 23 females) with previous PAF (n = 66) or SAF (n = 24). They were maintained in sinus rhythm successfully for at least 1 month after conversion and then studied by transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography. All of the patients were followed regularly by determination of symptoms, 12-lead ECG and intermittent Holter recording to determine recurrence of AF after echocardiographic study. Results: After 9.1 ± 3.8 (range 3–12) months of follow-up, 23 of the 90 (26%) patients had documented recurrence of AF (67 without recurrence). Univariate analysis of demographic characteristics, medications, ECG and echocardiographic parameters revealed that, compared with the group of patients without recurrent AF, the group of those with it included more members of the SAF group (11/27 vs. 13/67, p = 0.039), included more male subjects (22/23 vs. 45/67, p = 0.045), had a larger left atrial volume index (LAVI; 27 ± 9 vs. 22 ± 9 ml/m2, p = 0.024) and had lower LA appendage peak emptying velocity (LAAPEV; 42 ± 15 vs. 55 ± 22 cm/s, p = 0.01). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis adjusted for age, gender and AF group revealed that patients with LAVI <30 ml/m2 and LAAPEV >46 cm/s had the least recurrence of AF (relative risk 0.18, 95% confidence interval 0.06–0.55, vs. with LAVI >30 ml/m2 or LAAPEV <46 cm/s, p = 0.002). Kaplan-Meier probability of freedom from AF recurrence was significantly better when LAVI <30 ml/m2 (log-rank p = 0.02), LAAPEV > 46 cm/s (p = 0.013) or both (p = 0.004). The superiority to predict the rate of sinus rhythm maintenance was the same in the PAF and SAF groups. Conclusions: Good responders to rhythm control in the PAF and SAF groups share the characteristics of smaller LA volume and better LAA contractile function, emphasizing the critical role of atrial substrate remodeling in recurrence of AF.

Keywords:
Atrial fibrillation, Left atrial appendage, Left atrial volume
1.
The AFFIRM Investigators: A comparision of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation: N Engl J Med 2002;347:1825–1833.
2.
Gelder ICV, Hagens VE, Bosker HA, Kingma JH, Kamp O, Kingma T, Said SA, Darmanata JI, Timmermans AJM, Tijssen JGP, Crijns HJGM: A comparison of rate and rhythm control in patients with recurrent persistent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1834–1840.
3.
Fuster V, Ryden LE, Asinger RW, Cannom DS, Crijns HJ, Frye RL, Halperin JL, Kay GN, Klein WW, Levy S, McNamara RL, Prystowsky EN, Wann LS, Wyse DG: ACC/AHA/ESC guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines and Policy Conferences (Committee for Developing Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation). Circulation 2001;104:2118–2150.
4.
Pandozi C, Santini M: Update on atrial remodelling owing to rate. Does atrial fibrilation always ‘beget’ atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J 2001;22:541–553.
5.
Rodriguez LM, Timmermans C, Wellens HJ: Are electrophysiological changes induced by longer lasting atrial fibrillation reversible? Oberservations using the atrial defibrillator. Circulation 1999;100:113–116.
6.
Xu J, Cui G, Esmailian F, Plunkett M, Marelli D, Ardehali A, Odim J, Laks H, Sen L: Atrial extracellular matrix remodeling and the maintenance of atrial fibrillation. Circulation 2004;109:363–368.
7.
Todd DM, Fynn SP, Walden AP, Hobbs WJ, Arya S, Garratt CJ: Repetitive 4-week periods of atrial electrical remodeling promote stability of atrial fibrillation. Time course of a second factor involved in the self-perpetuation of atrial fibrillation. Circulation 2004;109:1434–1439.
8.
Pálinkás A, Antonielli E, Picano E, Pizzuti A, Varga A, Nyúzó B, Algrest JM, Bonzano A, Tanga M, Coppolino A, Forster T, Baralis G, Delnevo F, Csanády M: Clinical value of left atrial appendage flow velocity for predicting of cardioversion success in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J 2001;22:2201–2208.
9.
Antonielli E, Pizzuti A, Pálinkás A, Tanga M, Gruber N, Michelassi C, Varga A, Bonzano A, Gandolfo N, Halmai L, Bassignana A, Imran MB, Delnevo F, Csanády M, Picano E: Clinical value of left atrial appendage flow for prediction of long-term sinus rhythm maintenance in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:1443–1449.
10.
Omran H, Jung W, Schimpf R, MacCarter D, Rabahieh R, Wolpert C, Illien S, Lüderitz B: Echocardiographic parameters for predicting maintenance of sinus rhythm after internal atrial defibrillation. Am J Cardiol 1998;81:1446–1449.
11.
Bellotti P, Spirito P, Lupi G, Vecchio C: Left atrial appendage function assessed by transesophageal echocardiography before and on the day after elective cardioversion for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 1998;81:1199–1202.
12.
Omran H, Jung W, Rabahieh R, Schimpf R, Wolpert C, Hagendorff A, Fehske W, Luderitz B: Left atrial chamber and appendage function after internal atrial defibrillation: a prospective and serial transesophageal echocardiographic study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;29:131–138.
13.
Tabata T, Oki T, Iuchi A, Yamada H, Manabe K, Fukuda K, Abe M, Fukuda N, Ito S: Evaluation of left atrial appendage function by measurement of changes in flow velocity patterns after electrical cardioversion in patients with isolated atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 1997;79:615–620.
14.
Dethy M, Chassat C, Roy D, Mercier LA: Doppler echocardiographic predictors of recurrence of atrial fibrillation after cardioversion. Am J Cardiol 1988;62:723–726.
15.
Flaker GC, Fletcher KA, Rothbart RM, Halperin JL, Hart RG, and The Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation (SPAF) Investigators: Clinical and echocardiographic features of intermittent atrial fibrillation that predict recurrent atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 1995;76:355–358.
16.
Bollmann A, Husser D, Steinert R, Stridh M, Soernmo L, Olsson SB, Polywka D, Molling J, Geller C, Klein HU: Echocardiographic and electrocardiographic predictors for atrial fibrillation recurrence following cardioversion. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2003;14(suppl):S162–S165.
17.
Pritchett AM, Jacobsen SJ, Mahoney DW, Rodeheffer RJ, Bailey KR, Redfield MM: Left atrial volume as an index of left atrial size: A population-based study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:1036–1043.
18.
Tsang TSM, Barnes ME, Bailey KR, Leibson CL, Montgomery SC, Takemoto Y, Diamond PM, Marra MA, Gersh BJ, Wiebers DO, Petty GW, Seward JB: Left atrial volume: important risk marker of incident atrial fibrillation in 1655 older men and women. Mayo Clin Proc 2001;76:467–475.
19.
Tsang TSM, Barnes ME, Gersh BJ, Takemoto Y, Rosales AG, Bailey KR, Seward JB: Prediction of risk for first age-related cardiovascular events in an elderly population: the incremental value of echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;42:1199–1205.
20.
Mattioli AV, Sansoni S, Lucchi GR, Mattioli G: Serial evaluation of left atrial dimension after cardioversion for atrial fibrillation and relation to atrial function. Am J Cardiol 2000;85:832–836.
21.
Wyse DG: Rhythm versus rate control trials in atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2003;14(suppl):S35–S39.
22.
Wyse DG: Rhythm management in atrial fibrillation: less is more. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:1703–1706.
23.
Sadanandan S, Sherrid MV: Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics of left atrial spontaneous echo contrast in sinus rhythm. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:1932–1938.
© 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel
2005
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.