Key result
T wave alternans accurately predicted electrophysiological testing outcomes (84% accuracy, p<0.0001) and 20-month arrhythmia-free survival (86%, p<0.030), whereas SAECG was not a significant predictor.
Why the study?
Does microvolt T wave alternans measurement improve the prediction of ventricular arrhythmia susceptibility and arrhythmia-free survival compared to SAECG in patients undergoing electrophysiological testing?
Observational (n=43)
No
Does microvolt T wave alternans measurement improve the prediction of ventricular arrhythmia susceptibility and arrhythmia-free survival compared to SAECG in patients undergoing electrophysiological testing?
p-value: p=< 0.0001
Microvolt T wave alternans is a highly significant non-invasive predictor of ventricular arrhythmia inducibility and arrhythmia-free survival, outperforming signal-averaged ECG.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the accuracy of signal averaged electrocardiography (SAECG) and measurement of microvolt level T wave alternans as predictors of susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmias. DESIGN: Analysis of new data from a previously published prospective investigation. SETTING: Electrophysiology laboratory of a major referral hospital. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: 43 patients, not on class I or class III antiarrhythmic drug treatment, undergoing invasive electrophysiological testing had SAECG and T wave alternans measurements. The SAECG was considered positive in the presence of one (SAECG-I) or two (SAECG-II) of three standard criteria. T wave alternans was considered positive if the alternans ratio exceeded 3.0. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inducibility of sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation during electrophysiological testing, and 20 month arrhythmia-free survival. RESULTS: The accuracy of T wave alternans in predicting the outcome of electrophysiological testing was 84% (p < 0.0001). Neither SAECG-I (accuracy 60%; p < 0.29) nor SAECG-II (accuracy 71%; p < 0.10) was a statistically significant predictor of electrophysiological testing. SAECG, T wave alternans, electrophysiological testing, and follow up data were available in 36 patients while not on class I or III antiarrhythmic agents. The accuracy of T wave alternans in predicting the outcome of arrhythmia-free survival was 86% (p < 0.030). Neither SAECG-I (accuracy 65%; p < 0.21) nor SAECG-II (accuracy 71%; p < 0.48) was a statistically significant predictor of arrhythmia-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: T wave alternans was a highly significant predictor of the outcome of electrophysiological testing and arrhythmia-free survival, while SAECG was not a statistically significant predictor. Although these results need to be confirmed in prospective clinical studies, they suggest that T wave alternans may serve as a non-invasive probe for screening high risk populations for malignant ventricular arrhythmias.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Armoundas et al. (1998) conducted an observational in Susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmias (n=43). T wave alternans measurement vs. Signal averaged electrocardiography (SAECG) was evaluated on Inducibility of sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation during electrophysiological testing, and 20 month arrhythmia-free survival (p=< 0.0001). T wave alternans accurately predicted electrophysiological testing outcomes (84% accuracy, p<0.0001) and 20-month arrhythmia-free survival (86%, p<0.030), whereas SAECG was not a significant predictor.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: