Key result
The novel ventricular tachycardia score (≥1 point) demonstrated higher overall diagnostic accuracy for VT (83%) compared to the aVR algorithm (72%, P=0.001) and Brugada algorithm (81%).
Why the study?
Does the VT score method improve the diagnostic accuracy of ventricular tachycardia in patients with wide QRS complex tachycardia compared to the Brugada and aVR algorithms?
Observational (n=587)
Blinded observers
Does the VT score method improve the diagnostic accuracy of ventricular tachycardia in patients with wide QRS complex tachycardia compared to the Brugada and aVR algorithms?
Absolute Event Rate: 83% vs 72%
p-value: p=0.001
A novel 7-feature ECG-based VT score offers superior diagnostic accuracy and near-perfect specificity for identifying ventricular tachycardia among wide QRS complex tachycardias.
Supports VT score validation in prospective cohorts; leaves open whether it alters management of wide-complex tachycardia.
AIMS: Electrocardiographic diagnosis of wide QRS complex tachycardia (WCT) continues to be challenging as none one of the available methods is specific for ventricular tachycardia (VT) diagnosis. We aimed to construct a method for WCT differentiation based on a scoring system, in which ECGs are graded according to the number of VT-specific features. This novel method was validated and compared with Brugada algorithm and other methods. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 786 WCTs (512 VTs) from 587 consecutive patients with a proven diagnosis were analysed by two blinded observers. The VT score method was based on seven ECG features: initial R wave in V1, initial r > 40 ms in V1/V2, notched S in V1, initial R in aVR, lead II R wave peak time ≥50 ms, no RS in V1-V6, and atrioventricular dissociation. Atrioventricular dissociation was assigned two points, and each of the other features was assigned one point. The overall accuracy of VT score ≥1 for VT diagnosis (83%) was higher than that of the aVR (72%, P = 0.001) and Brugada (81%) algorithms. Ventricular tachycardia score ≥3 was present in 66% of VTs and was more specific (99.6%) than any other algorithm/criterion for VT diagnosis. Ventricular tachycardia score ≥4 was present in 33% of VTs and was 100% specific for VT. CONCLUSION: The new ECG-based method provides a certain diagnosis of VT in the majority of patients with VT, identifies unequivocal ECGs, and has superior overall diagnostic accuracy to other ECG methods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jastrzębski et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Wide QRS complex tachycardia (n=587). Ventricular tachycardia (VT) score vs. aVR and Brugada algorithms was evaluated on Overall accuracy for VT diagnosis (p=0.001). The novel ventricular tachycardia score (≥1 point) demonstrated higher overall diagnostic accuracy for VT (83%) compared to the aVR algorithm (72%, P=0.001) and Brugada algorithm (81%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: