Differences between typical and reverse typical atrial flutter identified by ultrahigh resolution mapping

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAlthough atrial flutter (AFL) is a common arrhythmia that is based on a macro‐reentrant tachycardia around the tricuspid annulus, the factors giving rise to typical AFL (t‐AFL) versus reverse typical AFL (rt‐AFL) are unknown. To investigate the difference between t‐AFL and rt‐AFL circuits using ultrahigh resolution mapping of the right atrium.MethodsWe investigated 30 isthmus‐dependent AFL patients (mean age 71, 28 male) who underwent first‐time cavo‐tricuspid isthmus (CTI) ablation guided by Boston Scientific's Rhythmia mapping system and divided them into two groups: t‐AFL (22 patients) and rt‐AFL (8 patients). We compared the anatomy and electrophysiology of their reentrant circuits.ResultsBaseline patient characteristics, use of antiarrhythmic drugs, prevalence of atrial fibrillation, AFL cycle length (227.1 ± 21.4 vs. 245.5 ± 36.0 ms, p = .10), and CTI length (31.9 ± 8.3 vs. 31.1 ± 5.2 mm, p = .80) did not differ between the two groups. Functional block was observed at the crista terminalis in 16 patients and at the sinus venosus in 11. No functional block was observed in three patients, all of whom belonged to the rt‐AFL group. That is, functional block was observed in 100% of the t‐AFL group as opposed to 5/8 (62.5%) of the rt‐AFL (p < .05). Slow conduction zones were frequently observed at the intra‐atrial septum in the t‐AFL group and at the CTI in the rt‐AFL group.ConclusionMapping with ultrahigh‐resolution mapping showed differences between t‐AFL and rt‐AFL in conduction properties in the right atrium and around the tricuspid valve, which suggested directional mechanisms.