ASSOCIATION OF LEFT ATRIAL FIBROSIS EXTENT WITH LEFT VENTRICULAR STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL REMODELLING IN PATIENTS WITH ATRIAL FIBRILLATION

Aim. To investigate the relationships between left atrial (LA) fibrosis extent and left ventricular (LV) structural and functional status in patients (pts) with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF).
Material and Methods. The study enrolled 56 pts (mean age 57.1±8.4 years, 25 females), admitted to hospital for primary catheter ablation (CA), including 47 pts with paroxysmal AF and 9 pts with persistent AF. All pts had scheduled transthoracic echocardiography to measure size and volume of cardiac chambers and systolic and diastolic functions of the left ventricle. Based on the calculation of the LV mass index (LVMI) and relative wall thickness (RWT), we categorized all pts into 4 groups: (1) normal geometry (n=27); (2) concentric remodeling (normal LVMI and high RWT, n=13); (3) concentric hypertrophy (high LVMI and high RWT, n=6); and (4) eccentric remodeling (high LVMI and normal RWT, n=10). The assessment of LA fibrosis sizes was based on the allocation of low voltage zones (<0.5 mV) in the process of voltage electroanatomic mapping (VEM) as the first stage of CA. Following indicators were calculated: total square of fibrosis (Sf), % of fibrosis from the total LA square (Sf%), the degree of LA fibrosis (an analog of the UTAH score), and number of LA fibrosis zones. Level of NT-proBNP in blood was determined among other laboratory tests. All pts had preserved LV ejection fraction (LVEF).
Results. Results of the study confirmed positive relationships between Sf, Sf% and LA diameter, LVMI, and NT-proBNP level. Negative relationship was noted between Sf, Sf%, the UTAH degree and LVEF. Such LV geometry type as eccentric hypertrophy was associated with a higher number of LA fibrosis zones compared to the normal LV geometry, while significant differences in other types of geometry were not found.
Conclusion. Thus, LA fibrosis extent was associated with LA size, LV function, and LV geometric remodeling pattern.

1. Majeed A., Moser K., Carroll K. Trends in the prevalence and management of atrial fibrillation in general practice in England and Wales. 1994–1998: analysis of data from the general practice research database. Heart. 2001;86:284–288. DOI: 10.1136/heart.86.3.284.

2. Chugh S.S., Blackshear J.L., Shen W.K., Hammill S.C., Gersh B.J. Epidemiology and natural history of atrial fibrillation: Clinical implications. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2001;37:371–378.

3. Wyse D.G., Van Gelder I.C., Ellinor P.T., Go A. S., Kalman J.M., Narayan S.M., et al. Lone atrial fibrillation: does it exist? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2014;63:1715–1723. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.023.

4. Rosenberg М.А., Manning W.J. Diastolic dysfunction and risk of atrial fibrillation: a mechanistic appraisal. Circulation. 2012;126:2353–2362. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.113233.

5. Chen H.H., Lainchbury J.G., Senni M., Bailey K.R., Redfield M.M. Diastolic heart failure in the community: clinical profile, natural history, therapy, and impact of proposed diagnostic criteria. J. Card. Fail. 2002;8:279–287.

6. Kottkamp H. Fibrotic atrial cardiomyopathy: a specific disease/syndrome supplying substrates for atrial fibrillation, atrial tachycardia, sinus node disease, AV node disease, and thromboembolic complications. J. Cardiovasc. Electrophysiol. 2012;23(7):797–799. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2012.02341.x.

7. Gal P., Marrouche N.F. Magnetic resonance imaging of atrial fibrosis: redefining atrial fibrillation to a syndrome. Eur. Heart J. 2017;38:14–19. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv514.

8. Hansen B.J., Zhao J., Csepe T.A., Moor B.T., Li N., Jayne L.A., et al. Atrial fibrillation driven by micro-anatomic intramural re-entry revealed by simultaneous sub-epicardial and sub-endocardial optical mapping in explanted human hearts. Eur. Heart J. 2015;36:2390–2401.

9. Piorkowski C., Hindricks G., Schreiber D., Tanner H., Weise W., Koch A., et al. Electroanatomic reconstruction of the left atrium, pulmonary veins, and esophagus compared with the “true anatomy” on multislice computed tomography in patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2006;3:317–327.

10. Akoum N., Morris A., Perry D., Cates J., Burgon N., Kholmovski E., et al. Substrate modification is a better predictor of catheter ablation success in atrial fibrillation than pulmonary vein isolation: An LGE-MRI Study. Clin. Med. Insights Cardiol. 2015;27(9):25–31. DOI: 10.4137/CMC.S22100.

11. Mahnkopf C., Badger T.J., Burgon N.S., Daccarett M., Haslam T.S., Badger C.T., et al. Evaluation of the left atrial substrate in patients with lone atrial fibrillation using delayed-enhanced MRI: implications for disease progression and response to catheter ablation. Heart Rhythm. 2010;7:1475–1481. DOI: 10/1016/j.hrthm.2010.06.030.

12. Pilichowska-Paszkiet Е., Baran J., Sygitowicz G., Sikorska A., Stec S., Kułakowski P., et al. Noninvasive assessment of left atrial fibrosis. Correlation between echocardiography, biomarkers, and electroanatomical mapping. Echocardiography. 2018;35(9):13261334. DOI: 10.1111/echo.14043.

13. Lang R.M., Badano L.P., Mor-Avi V., Afilalo J., Armstrong A., Ernande L. et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2015;16(3):233–270. DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jev014.

14. Nagueh S.F., Smiseth O.A., Appleton C.P., Byrd B.F., Dokainish H., Edvardsen T., et al. Recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2016;29(4):277–314. DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2016.01.011.

15. Stiles M.K., John B., Wong C.X., Kuklik P., Brooks A.G., Lau D.H., et al. Paroxysmal lone atrial fibrillation is associated with an abnormal atrial substrate: Characterizing the “second factor”. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2009;53(14):1182–1191. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.11.054.

16. Zile M.R., Baicu C.F., Ikonomidis J., Stroud R.E., Nietert P.J., Bradshaw A.D., et al. Myocardial stiffness in patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction: contributions of collagen and titin. Circulation. 2015;131:1247–1259. DOI:10.1161/circulationaha.114.013215.

17. Karetnikova V.N., Kashtalap V.V., Kosareva S.N., Barbarash O.L. Myocardial fibrosis: Current aspects of the problem. Terapevticheskiy arkhiv=Therapeutic Archive. 2017;89(1):88–93 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17116/terarkh201789188-93.

18. Alekhin M.N., Grishin A.M., Petrova O.A. The evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography in patients with preserved ejection fraction. Kardiologiia. 2017;57(2):40–45 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.18565/cardio.2017.2.40-45.

19. Seko Y., Kato T., Haruna T., Izumi T., Miyamoto S., Nakane E., et al. Association between atrial fibrillation, atrial enlargement, and left ventricular geometric remodeling. Scientific Reports. 2018;8:63–66. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-24875-1.

20. Hudsmith L.E., Tyler D.J., Emmanuel Y., Petersen S.E., Francis J.M., Watkins H., et al. 31P cardiac magnetic resonance spectroscopy during leg exercise at 3 Tesla. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging. 2009;25:819–826. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-009-9492-8.

21. Mazaev V.V., Stukalova O.V., Ternovoy S.K., Chazova I.E. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy in hypertensives with left ventricle hypertrophy – assessment of energy metabolism. Russian Electronic Journal of Radiology. 2013;3(1):36–42 (In Russ.).