The isthmus characteristics of scar‐related macroreentrant atrial tachycardia in patients with and without cardiac surgery

Introduction Identifying the critical isthmus (CI) in scar‐related macroreentrant atrial tachycardia (AT) is challenging, especially for patients with cardiac surgery. We aimed to investigate the electrophysiological characteristics of scar‐related macroreentrant ATs in patients with and without car...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology 2021-07, Vol.32 (7), p.1921-1930
Hauptverfasser: Liu, Shin‐Huei, Lin, Yenn‐Jiang, Lee, Po‐Tseng, Vicera, Jennifer Jeanne, Chang, Shih‐Lin, Lo, Li‐Wei, Hu, Yu‐Feng, Chung, Fa‐Po, Tuan, Ta‐Chuan, Chao, Tze‐Fan, Liao, Jo‐Nan, Chang, Ting‐Yung, Lin, Chin‐Yu, Wu, Cheng‐I, Liu, Chih‐Min, Cheng, Wen‐Han, Chen, Shih‐Ann
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Introduction Identifying the critical isthmus (CI) in scar‐related macroreentrant atrial tachycardia (AT) is challenging, especially for patients with cardiac surgery. We aimed to investigate the electrophysiological characteristics of scar‐related macroreentrant ATs in patients with and without cardiac surgery. Methods A prospective study of 31 patients (mean age 59.4 ± 9.81 years old) with scar‐related macroreentrant ATs were enrolled for investigation of substrate properties. Patients were categorized into the nonsurgery (n = 18) and surgery group (n = 13). The CIs were defined by concealed entrainment, conduction velocity less than 0.3 m/s, and the presence of local fractionated electrograms. Results Among the 31 patients, a total of 65 reentrant circuits and 76 CIs were identified on the coherent map. The scar in the surgical group is larger than the nonsurgical group (18.81 ± 9.22 vs. 10.23 ± 5.34%, p = .016). The CIs in surgical group have longer CI length (15.27 ± 4.89 vs. 11.20 ± 2.96 mm, p = .004), slower conduction velocity (0.46 ± 0.19 vs. 0.69 ± 0.14 m/s, p 
ISSN:1045-3873
1540-8167
DOI:10.1111/jce.15034