Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2005
"V-H-A Pattern" as a criterion for the differential diagnosis of atypical AV nodal reentrant tachycardia from AV reciprocating tachycardia.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Owada Shingen, Iwasa Atsushi, Sasaki Shingo, Higuma Takumi, Kimura Masaomi, Kobayashi Takao, Ashikaga Keiichi, Okumura Ken
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: During ventricular extrastimulation, His bundle potential (H) following ventricular (V) and followed by atrial potentials (A), i.e., V-H-A, is observed in the His bundle electrogram when ventriculo-atrial (VA) conduction occurs via the normal conduction system. We examined the diagnostic value of V-H-A for atypical form of atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT), which showed the earliest atrial activation site at the posterior paraseptal region during the tachycardia.
METHODS: We prospectively examined the response of VA conduction to ventricular extrastimulation during basic drive pacing performed during sinus rhythm in 16 patients with atypical AVNRT masquerading atrioventricular reciprocating tachycardia (AVRT) utilizing a posterior paraseptal accessory pathway and 21 with AVRT utilizing a posterior paraseptal accessory pathway. Long RP' tachycardia with RP'/RR > 0.5 was excluded. The incidences of V-H-A and dual AV nodal physiology (DP) were compared between atypical AVNRT and AVRT.
RESULTS: V-H-A was demonstrated in all the 16 patients (100%) in atypical AVNRT and in only 1 of the 21 (5%) in AVRT (P < 0.001). DP was demonstrated in 10 patients (63%) in atypical AVNRT and in 4 (19%) in AVRT (P < 0.05). The sensitivity of V-H-A for atypical AVNRT was higher than that of DP (P < 0.05). Positive and negative predictive values were 94% and 100%, respectively, for V-H-A and 71% and 74%, respectively, for DP.
CONCLUSIONS: The appearance of V-H-A during ventricular extrastimulation is a simple criterion for differentiating atypical AVNRT masquerading AVRT from AVRT utilizing a posterior paraseptal accessory pathway.
METHODS: We prospectively examined the response of VA conduction to ventricular extrastimulation during basic drive pacing performed during sinus rhythm in 16 patients with atypical AVNRT masquerading atrioventricular reciprocating tachycardia (AVRT) utilizing a posterior paraseptal accessory pathway and 21 with AVRT utilizing a posterior paraseptal accessory pathway. Long RP' tachycardia with RP'/RR > 0.5 was excluded. The incidences of V-H-A and dual AV nodal physiology (DP) were compared between atypical AVNRT and AVRT.
RESULTS: V-H-A was demonstrated in all the 16 patients (100%) in atypical AVNRT and in only 1 of the 21 (5%) in AVRT (P < 0.001). DP was demonstrated in 10 patients (63%) in atypical AVNRT and in 4 (19%) in AVRT (P < 0.05). The sensitivity of V-H-A for atypical AVNRT was higher than that of DP (P < 0.05). Positive and negative predictive values were 94% and 100%, respectively, for V-H-A and 71% and 74%, respectively, for DP.
CONCLUSIONS: The appearance of V-H-A during ventricular extrastimulation is a simple criterion for differentiating atypical AVNRT masquerading AVRT from AVRT utilizing a posterior paraseptal accessory pathway.