Predictive value of atrial electromechanical delay for atrial fibrillation recurrence

Background: We investigated the predictive value of atrial electromechanical delay (AEMD) for recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) at 1-month after cardioversion.Methods: Seventy-seven patients with persistent AF were evaluated and finally 50 patients (12 men, 38 women) were included. All patients underwent transthoracic electrical DC cardioversion under amiodarone treatment. AEMD was measured as the time interval from the onset of the P wave on electrogram (ECG) to the beginning of late diastolic wave (Am) from the ventricular annulus and atrial walls on tissue Doppler imaging, in the apical 4-chamber view 24 h after cardiversion. P wave maximum-duration (Pmax), P wave minimum-duration (Pmin) and P wave dispersion-duration (Pdis) were calculated on the 12-lead ECG at 24-h postcardioversion. We followed the heart rate and rhythm by 12-lead ECG at 24-h, 1-week and 1-month.Results: At 1-month follow-up after cardioversion, 28 (56%) patients were in sinus rhythm (SR), whereas 22 (44%) patients reverted to AF. The AEMD durations were longer in AF group than SR group (p < 0.001) and were signifi cantly correlated with Pmax and Pdis (p < 0.001 for both). For AF recurrence; duration of AF, left atrial (LA) diameter, maximum LA volume index, mitral A velocity and LA lateral AEMD were significant parameters in univariate-analysis, however LA lateral AEMD was the only significant parameter in multivariate-analysis (OR: 1.46; 95% CI 1.02–2.11; p = 0.03).Conclusions: Our results suggest that AEMD is associated with an increased risk of recurrence of AF within 1-month. These data may have implications for the identification of patients who are most likely to experience substantial benefit from cardiversion therapy for AF

The Effect of High Dose Cilostazol and Rosuvastatin on Periprocedural Myocardial Injury in Patients with Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background: The aim of our study was to assess the effect of pretreatment with cilostazol and rosuvastatin combination before elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on peri-procedural myocardial injury (PPMIJ). Methods: We randomly assigned 172 patients with stable angina pectoris scheduled for elective PCI to pretreatment with Cilostazol 200mg and Rosuvastatin 40 mg (group 1), or to pretreatment with Rosuvastatin 40 mg group (group 2). The primary end-point was the occurrence of PPMIJ defined as any cardiac troponin I (Tn I) level elevated above the upper normal limit (UNL). The occurrence of peri-procedural myocardial infarction (PPMIN) was defined as a post-procedural increase in cTnI level ³ 5 times above the UNL. Results: There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between group 1 (n = 86) and group 2 (n = 86). The rate of PPMIJ (21% vs. 24%, p = 0.58) and PPMIN (2.3% vs. 7%, p = 0.27) were similar between the two study groups. Subgroup analysis performed on those patients without statin therapy before PCI (53 patients in group 1 and 50 patients in group 2) showed that the incidence of PPMIJ was significantly lower in the group 1 patients without chronic statin treatment [17% (9/53) versus 34% (17/50); p = 0.04], but the rate of PPMIN was similar between the two groups for those patients without chronic statin treatment [1.9% (1/53) versus 10% (5/50); p = 0.07]. Conclusions: We found that adjunct cilostazol and rosuvastatin pre-treatment did not significantly reduce PPMIJ after elective PCI in patients with stable angina pectoris. However, adjunct cilostazol pre-treatment could reduce PPMIJ in patients without chronic statin therapy before elective PCI