Why the study?
Does incremental scanning compared to decremental scanning affect the determination of the ventricular effective refractory period in anesthetized dogs with chronic AV block?
Does incremental scanning compared to decremental scanning affect the determination of the ventricular effective refractory period in anesthetized dogs with chronic AV block?
Incremental scanning provides equivalent VERP measurements to decremental scanning while avoiding recurrent and abrupt rate changes, making it preferable when arrhythmia induction must be avoided.
Equivalent VERP by incremental scanning in this canine model; leaves open clinical preference to avoid rate changes.
In the clinical setting, the ventricular effective refractory period (VERP) is determined by an 8-beat drive train (S1S1), followed by a premature stimulus (S2), which is decremented in subsequent drive trains until capture is lost. Variation in intertrain pauses and capturing extra stimuli disturb steady-state conditions and reduce reproducibility of values found for the VERP. To increase reproducibility, a protocol without intertrain pause and incremental scanning (IS) of S2 was developed. In anesthetized dogs with chronic AV block, determination of the VERP using IS and decremental scanning (DS) without intertrain pause was compared at 800 and 350 msec pacing cycle length (PCL). The measurements were repeated after the administration of d-sotalol to lengthen the VERP and levcromakalim to shorten the VERP. The results showed no difference between IS and DS at both PCLs with or without medication. Recurrent and abrupt rate changes were avoided during IS, making this the protocol of choice when induction of arrhythmias is to be avoided.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
LEERSSEN et al. (1994) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: