Key result
The post-pacing interval after failed ATP was significantly longer in atrial arrhythmias compared to ventricular tachycardia (693 vs 512 ms; P<0.01), allowing for accurate discrimination.
Why the study?
Do PPI and PPI - TCL measurements after failed ATP differentiate atrial arrhythmias from ventricular tachycardia in patients with ICDs?
Population
155 consecutive patients implanted with dual or biventricular implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.
Comparison
Measurement of post-pacing interval and… vs Comparison of measurements between atrial…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
23-month
Authors
Loading...
PPI and PPI - TCL measurements after failed ATP can accurately discriminate between supraventricular tachycardia and VT in ICDs, potentially reducing inappropriate therapies.
Observational (n=155)
No
Do PPI and PPI - TCL measurements after failed ATP differentiate atrial arrhythmias from ventricular tachycardia in patients with ICDs?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.93 (95% CI 0.84-1.00)
Absolute Event Rate: 693% vs 512%
p-value: p=<0.01
PPI and PPI - TCL measurements after failed ATP can accurately discriminate between supraventricular tachycardia and VT in ICDs, potentially reducing inappropriate therapies.
Michael et al. (2014) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation/tachycardia and ventricular tachycardia in ICD patients (n=155). Post-pacing interval (PPI) evaluation vs. Ventricular tachycardia (VT) was evaluated on Mean post-pacing interval (PPI) (AUC 0.93, 95% CI 0.84-1.00, p=<0.01). The post-pacing interval after failed ATP was significantly longer in atrial arrhythmias compared to ventricular tachycardia (693 vs 512 ms; P<0.01), allowing for accurate discrimination.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: