Left atrial structure and function among different subtypes of atrial fibrillation: an echocardiographic substudy of

Flemming Javier Olsen1, Stine Darkner2, Xu Chen2

  • 1Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Gentofte Hospitalsvej 1, 2900 Hellerup, Denmark.

Insights

Persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) and high AF burden significantly impair left atrial (LA) function and structure. These findings highlight differences in cardiac mechanics across AF subtypes and burden.

Area of Science:

  • Cardiology
  • Cardiac Imaging
  • Electrophysiology

Background:

  • Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia with varying subtypes, including paroxysmal AF (PxAF) and persistent AF (PxAF).
  • Understanding the impact of AF subtypes and burden on cardiac structure and function, particularly left atrial (LA) mechanics, is crucial for patient management.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate differences in left atrial (LA) structure and function between paroxysmal AF (PxAF) and persistent AF (PxAF).
  • To assess the impact of AF burden (0%, 0-99%, and 99-100%) on LA measures.

Main Methods:

  • A cross-sectional echocardiographic substudy of 212 AF patients scheduled for catheter ablation.
  • Conventional echocardiography and LA/LV speckle tracking were performed.
  • Comparison of LA measures based on AF subtype (PxAF vs. PxAF) and AF burden (0%, 0-99%, 99-100%) determined by 72-h Holter monitoring.

Main Results:

  • Patients with PxAF exhibited significantly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, larger LA volumes (LAVi, LAEDVi), and impaired LA function (LAEF, LAs) compared to PxAF.
  • Significantly reduced LA measures and systolic function were observed in patients with 99-100% AF burden.
  • No significant differences in LA measures were found between 0% and 0-99% AF burden groups.

Conclusions:

  • Left atrial (LA) mechanics are significantly different between atrial fibrillation (AF) subtypes and across varying AF burdens.
  • These distinct LA characteristics necessitate careful consideration for accurate clinical interpretation of echocardiographic findings in AF patients.
Abstract