Effect of acute atrial fibrillation on phasic coronary blood flow pattern and flow reserve in humans.

AIMS: To assess the effect of experimentally induced atrial fibrillation on coronary flow in humans. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 16 patients (10 men, mean age 43+/-13 years) with normal coronary vessels, baseline and hyperaemic blood pressure and Doppler phasic coronary flow velocity were measured, using a 0.014 inch intracoronary Doppler flow wire, during sinus rhythm, experimentally induced atrial fibrillation, and right atrial pacing at a similar heart rate to that during atrial fibrillation. Coronary flow velocity integral per minute increased significantly during both right atrial pacing and atrial fibrillation compared to sinus rhythm, but during right atrial pacing the increase was greater (85+/-43% vs 52+/-25%, P<0.001). This difference persisted even after correction for the product of heart rate and blood pressure (1.15+/-0.51 vs 0.97+/-0.46, respectively, P<0.02). In a further 12 paced patients (seven men, mean age 54+/-10 years) with complete atrioventricular block the induction of atrial fibrillation (atrial fibrillation with regular RR interval) caused no significant changes in coronary flow velocity variables. CONCLUSIONS: Acute atrial fibrillation in humans causes an increase in coronary flow that is, however, insufficient to compensate for the augmented myocardial oxygen demand, mainly because of the irregularity in the ventricular rhythm that exists during atrial fibrillation.

The role of laser-induced fluorescence in myocardial tissue characterization: an experimental in vitro study.

OBJECTIVE: The fluorescence of tissue when stimulated by a laser beam is a well-known phenomenon. The resulting emission spectra depend on the biochemical and structural composition of the tissue. In this study, we examined the spectra of laser-induced fluorescence emitted by myocardial tissue. METHODS: We used an argon-ion laser to stimulate the myocardium of 20 intact sheep hearts. For each spectral emission, we calculated the intensity in specific regions in order to characterize the spectra and to reveal intercavitary and intracavitary morphologic differences. RESULTS: The statistical analysis showed significant differences in the emission spectra intensity between atria and ventricles. The intensity was higher in the atria than in the ventricles (p < 0.001). The atrial emission spectra were morphologically different from those of the ventricles. There was no difference in the intensity or morphology of emission spectra within each chamber. All measurements showed good reproducibility after a short period of time. CONCLUSIONS: Laser-induced fluorescence of myocardial tissue seems to have the characteristics necessary for tissue recognition. This might prove useful in identifying cardiomyopathies and transplant rejection, as well as for myocardial mapping, assisting electrophysiologists in discovering fibrotic arrhythmogenic foci.

Sotalol vs metoprolol for ventricular rate control in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation who have undergone digitalization: a single-blinded crossover study.

AIMS: To compare the effects of sotalol and metoprolol on heart rate, during isotonic (ITE) and isometric (IME) exercise and daily activities, in digitalized patients with chronic atrial fibrillation. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study had a randomized, single-blinded, crossover design. Twenty-three patients with chronic atrial fibrillation received placebo for 4 weeks, followed by a 4-week period of treatment with sotalol and metoprolol in random order. At the end of each period, the patients were assessed with 24-h ECG monitoring, a cardiopulmonary exercise test and a handgrip manoeuvre. Both agents produced a lower heart rate than placebo at rest and at all levels of isotonic exercise (P < 0.001) without affecting oxygen uptake. Sotalol produced a lower heart rate than metoprolol only at submaximal exercise (116 +/- 9 bpm for sotalol vs 125 +/- 11 bpm for metoprolol, P < 0.001). During isometric exercise, sotalol produced a lower maximum heart rate than did metoprolol (113 +/- 22 vs 129 +/- 18 bpm, respectively). Both agents produced a lower mean heart rate than placebo over 24 h (P < 0.001 for all), while sotalol produced a lower mean heart rate than metoprolol during the daytime (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Sotalol is a safe and effective agent for control of heart rate in digitalized patients with atrial fibrillation. Sotalol is superior to metoprolol at submaximal exercise, resulting in better rate control during daily activities.