We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Left atrial appendage "stunning" after electrical cardioversion of atrial flutter: an attenuated response compared with atrial fibrillation as the mechanism for lower susceptibility to thromboembolic events.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology 1997 March 1
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine whether left atrial appendage stunning occurs in patients with atrial flutter and to compare left atrial appendage function in the pericardioversion period with that in patients with atrial fibrillation.
BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage stunning has recently been proposed as a key mechanistic phenomenon in the etiology of postcardioversion thromboembolic events in atrial fibrillation. Atrial flutter is thought to be associated with a negligible risk of thromboembolic events; therefore, anticoagulation is commonly withheld before and after cardioversion in these patients.
METHODS: Sixty-three patients with atrial flutter (n = 19) or atrial fibrillation (n = 44) underwent transesophageal echocardiography immediately before and after electrical cardioversion. In addition to assessing the presence of thrombus and spontaneous echo contrast, we measured left atrial appendage emptying velocity and calculated shear rates by pulsed wave Doppler and two-dimensional echocardiography.
RESULTS: Patients with atrial flutter exhibited greater left atrial appendage flow velocities before cardioversion than those with atrial fibrillation (42 +/- 19 vs. 28 +/- 15 cm/s [mean +/- SD], p < 0.001). Left atrial appendage shear rates were also higher in patients with atrial flutter (103 +/- 82 vs. 59 +/- 37 s-1, p < 0.001). After cardioversion, left atrial appendage flow velocities decreased compared with precardioversion values in patients with atrial fibrillation (28 +/- 15 before to 15 +/- 14 cm/s after cardioversion, p < 0.001) and atrial flutter (42 +/- 19 to 27 +/- 18 cm/s, respectively, p < 0.001). Shear rates decreased from 59 +/- 37 before cardioversion to 30 +/- 31 s-1 after cardioversion in atrial fibrillation (p < 0.001), and from 103 +/- 82 s to 65 +/- 52 s-1, respectively (p < 0.001), in atrial flutter. This decrease in flow velocity from before to after cardioversion occurred in 36 (82%) of 44 patients with atrial fibrillation and 14 (74%) of 19 with atrial flutter. The impaired left atrial appendage function after cardioversion was less pronounced in the group with atrial flutter (27 +/- 18 cm/s for atrial flutter vs. 15 +/- 14 cm/s for atrial fibrillation, p < 0.001). New or increased spontaneous echo contrast occurred in 22 (50%) of 44 patients with atrial fibrillation versus 4 (21%) of 19 with atrial flutter (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Left atrial appendage stunning also occurs in patients with atrial flutter, although to a lesser degree than in those with atrial fibrillation. These data suggest that patients with atrial flutter are at risk for thromboembolic events after cardioversion, although this risk is most likely lower than that in patients with atrial fibrillation because of better preserved left atrial appendage function.
BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage stunning has recently been proposed as a key mechanistic phenomenon in the etiology of postcardioversion thromboembolic events in atrial fibrillation. Atrial flutter is thought to be associated with a negligible risk of thromboembolic events; therefore, anticoagulation is commonly withheld before and after cardioversion in these patients.
METHODS: Sixty-three patients with atrial flutter (n = 19) or atrial fibrillation (n = 44) underwent transesophageal echocardiography immediately before and after electrical cardioversion. In addition to assessing the presence of thrombus and spontaneous echo contrast, we measured left atrial appendage emptying velocity and calculated shear rates by pulsed wave Doppler and two-dimensional echocardiography.
RESULTS: Patients with atrial flutter exhibited greater left atrial appendage flow velocities before cardioversion than those with atrial fibrillation (42 +/- 19 vs. 28 +/- 15 cm/s [mean +/- SD], p < 0.001). Left atrial appendage shear rates were also higher in patients with atrial flutter (103 +/- 82 vs. 59 +/- 37 s-1, p < 0.001). After cardioversion, left atrial appendage flow velocities decreased compared with precardioversion values in patients with atrial fibrillation (28 +/- 15 before to 15 +/- 14 cm/s after cardioversion, p < 0.001) and atrial flutter (42 +/- 19 to 27 +/- 18 cm/s, respectively, p < 0.001). Shear rates decreased from 59 +/- 37 before cardioversion to 30 +/- 31 s-1 after cardioversion in atrial fibrillation (p < 0.001), and from 103 +/- 82 s to 65 +/- 52 s-1, respectively (p < 0.001), in atrial flutter. This decrease in flow velocity from before to after cardioversion occurred in 36 (82%) of 44 patients with atrial fibrillation and 14 (74%) of 19 with atrial flutter. The impaired left atrial appendage function after cardioversion was less pronounced in the group with atrial flutter (27 +/- 18 cm/s for atrial flutter vs. 15 +/- 14 cm/s for atrial fibrillation, p < 0.001). New or increased spontaneous echo contrast occurred in 22 (50%) of 44 patients with atrial fibrillation versus 4 (21%) of 19 with atrial flutter (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Left atrial appendage stunning also occurs in patients with atrial flutter, although to a lesser degree than in those with atrial fibrillation. These data suggest that patients with atrial flutter are at risk for thromboembolic events after cardioversion, although this risk is most likely lower than that in patients with atrial fibrillation because of better preserved left atrial appendage function.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: 2025 Update on the Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Therapy.American Journal of Hematology 2025 January 28
Hepatic encephalopathy - when lactulose and rifaximin are not working.Gastroenterology 2025 January 24
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2025 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app