Left atrial reverse remodeling and prevention of progression of atrial fibrillation with atrial resynchronization device therapy utilizing dual-site right atrial pacing in patients with atrial fibrillation refractory to antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation.

Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing

PubMedID: 25080310

Nagarakanti R, Slee A, Saksena S. Left atrial reverse remodeling and prevention of progression of atrial fibrillation with atrial resynchronization device therapy utilizing dual-site right atrial pacing in patients with atrial fibrillation refractory to antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2014;.
INTRODUCTION
Dual-site right atrial pacing (DAP) produces electrical atrial resynchronization but its long-term effect on the atrial mechanical function in patients with refractory atrial fibrillation (AF) has not been studied.

METHODS
Drug-refractory paroxysmal (PAF) and persistent AF (PRAF) patients previously implanted with a dual-site right atrial pacemaker (DAP) with minimal ventricular pacing modes (AAIR or DDDR mode with long AV delay) were studied. Echocardiographic structural (left atrial diameter [LAD] and left ventricular [LV] end diastolic diameter [EDD], end systolic diameter [ESD]) and functional (ejection fraction [EF]) parameters were serially assessed prior to, after medium-term (n?=?39) and long-term (n?=?34) exposure to DAP.

RESULTS
During medium-term follow-up (n?=?4.5 months), there was improvement in left atrial function. Mean peak A wave flow velocity increased with DAP as compared to baseline (75?±?19 vs. 63?±?23 cm/s, p?=?0.003). The long-term impact of DAP was studied with baseline findings being compared with last follow-up data with a mean interval of 37?±?25 (range 7-145) months. Mean LAD declined from 45?±?5 mm at baseline to 42?±?7 mm (p?=?0.003). Mean LVEF was unchanged from 52?±?9 % at baseline and 54?±?6 % at last follow-up (p?=?0.3). There was no significant change in LV dimensions with mean LVEDD being 51?±?6 mm at baseline and 53?±?5 mm at last follow-up (p?=?0.3). Mean LVESD also remained unchanged from 35?±?6 mm at baseline to 33?±?6 mm at last follow-up (p?=?0.47). During long-term follow-up, 30 patients (89 %) remained in sinus or atrial paced rhythm as assessed by device diagnostics at 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS
DAP can achieve long-term atrial reverse remodeling and preserve LV systolic function. DAP when added to antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) and/or catheter ablation (ABL) maintains long-term rhythm control and prevents AF progression in elderly refractory AF patients. Reverse remodeling with DAP may contribute to long-term rhythm control.