See the published version of this article at Cardiovascular Ultrasound.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research
Takahide Ito
Osaka Medical College
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4850-9132
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at Cardiovascular Ultrasound.
Background: Tissue Doppler imaging (TDI)-derived atrial electromechanical delay (AEMD) has been reported to be useful for detecting paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). However, its usefulness remains unknown when analyzed along with patients seemingly at high-risk for AF as controls. From this standpoint, we investigated whether AEMD would be of use for identifying patients with PAF.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed TDI recordings to obtain AEMD in 63 PAF patients. Thirty-three patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors (MRFs) but without history of AF and 50 healthy individuals served as disease and healthy controls, respectively. AEMD was defined as the time-interval between the electrocardiogram P-wave and the beginning of the spectral TDI-derived A’ for the septal (septal EMD) and lateral (lateral EMD) sides of the mitral annulus.
Results: There was no significant difference in the left atrial volume index between PAF patients and disease controls (28 ± 9 mL/m 2 vs. 27 ± 5 mL/m 2 ). PAF patients had longer AEMD, particularly for the lateral EMD (75 ± 23 ms), compared with disease (62 ± 22 ms, P = 0.009) and healthy (54 ± 24 ms, P <0.001) controls. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the lateral EMD (OR 1.25, 95%CI 1.03 – 1.52, P = 0.023), along with the left atrial volume index (OR 2.25, 95%CI 1.44 – 3.51, P <0.001), was one of the significant independent associates of identifying PAF patients.
Conclusions: This cross-sectional study indicates that even analyzed together with MRFs patients, AEMD remains useful for identifying patients at risk for AF. Our results need to be confirmed by a large-scale prospective study.
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, tissue Doppler imaging, atrial electromechanical delay
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
Version 2
Posted 03 Jun, 2020
Published
On 22 Jun, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 03 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 30 May, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 30 May, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 27 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 26 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 25 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 25 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 27 Apr, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 25 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 17 Apr, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 14 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 08 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 07 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 06 Apr, 2020
First submitted
On 03 Apr, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
This preprint is under consideration at Cardiovascular Ultrasound. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research
Takahide Ito
Osaka Medical College
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4850-9132
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
Version 2
Posted 03 Jun, 2020
Published
On 22 Jun, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 03 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 30 May, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 30 May, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 27 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 26 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 25 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 25 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 27 Apr, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 25 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 17 Apr, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 14 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 08 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 07 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 06 Apr, 2020
First submitted
On 03 Apr, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at Cardiovascular Ultrasound.
Background: Tissue Doppler imaging (TDI)-derived atrial electromechanical delay (AEMD) has been reported to be useful for detecting paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). However, its usefulness remains unknown when analyzed along with patients seemingly at high-risk for AF as controls. From this standpoint, we investigated whether AEMD would be of use for identifying patients with PAF.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed TDI recordings to obtain AEMD in 63 PAF patients. Thirty-three patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors (MRFs) but without history of AF and 50 healthy individuals served as disease and healthy controls, respectively. AEMD was defined as the time-interval between the electrocardiogram P-wave and the beginning of the spectral TDI-derived A’ for the septal (septal EMD) and lateral (lateral EMD) sides of the mitral annulus.
Results: There was no significant difference in the left atrial volume index between PAF patients and disease controls (28 ± 9 mL/m 2 vs. 27 ± 5 mL/m 2 ). PAF patients had longer AEMD, particularly for the lateral EMD (75 ± 23 ms), compared with disease (62 ± 22 ms, P = 0.009) and healthy (54 ± 24 ms, P <0.001) controls. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the lateral EMD (OR 1.25, 95%CI 1.03 – 1.52, P = 0.023), along with the left atrial volume index (OR 2.25, 95%CI 1.44 – 3.51, P <0.001), was one of the significant independent associates of identifying PAF patients.
Conclusions: This cross-sectional study indicates that even analyzed together with MRFs patients, AEMD remains useful for identifying patients at risk for AF. Our results need to be confirmed by a large-scale prospective study.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Loading...