Characterization of neutrophil b-type cytochrome in situ by electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy

AbstractElectron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy at 4.2 K was successfully used to characterize neutrophil b-type cytochrome in situ. The spectra or resting neutrophils taken under aerobic conditions gave a set of characteristic signals in a high magnetic field (g=2.85, 2.21 and 1.67) beside signals for myeloperoxidase and others. From the g values, shapes and the results of other experiments, these signals were attributed to those of cytochrome b558. The results indicate that cytochrome b558 in resting neutrophils is a hexa-coordinated ferric hemoprotein in a low-spin state. The obtained g??? and g??? values for the hemichrome were consistent with that of bis(imiduzole)-coordinated hemoprotein

Prognostic Implications and Efficacy of Catheter Ablation by Atrial Fibrillation Type

Background Catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is preferred for paroxysmal AF (PAF) but selectively performed in patients with persistent AF (PersAF). This study aimed to investigate the prognostic differences and consequences of CA based on the AF type. Methods and Results Data from a multicenter AF cohort study were analyzed, categorizing patients as PAF or PersAF according to AF duration (≤7 or >7 days, respectively). A composite of all‐cause death, heart failure hospitalization, stroke, and bleeding events during 2‐year follow‐up and changes in the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality‐of‐life score were compared. Additionally, propensity score matching was performed to compare clinical outcomes of patients with and without CA in both AF types. Among 2788 patients, 51.6% and 48.4% had PAF and PersAF, respectively. Patients with PersAF had a higher incidence of the composite outcome (12.8% versus 7.2%; P<0.001) and smaller improvements in Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality‐of‐life scores than those with PAF. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, PersAF was an independent predictor of adverse outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.30–1.78], P=0.031) and was associated with poor improvements in Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality‐of‐life scores. Propensity score matching analysis showed that the CA group had significantly fewer adverse events than the medication group among patients with PAF (odds ratio, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.18–0.68]; P=0.002). Patients with PersAF showed a similar but nonsignificant trend. Conclusions PersAF is a risk factor for worse clinical outcomes, including patients' health status. CA is associated with fewer adverse events, although careful consideration is required based on the AF type