Why the study?
Which diagnostic modality (exercise test, Holter monitoring, or programmed electrical stimulation) is best for detecting ventricular arrhythmias in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?
Which diagnostic modality (exercise test, Holter monitoring, or programmed electrical stimulation) is best for detecting ventricular arrhythmias in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?
In patients with HCM, programmed electrical stimulation frequently induces VT/VF, and 24-hour Holter monitoring is superior to exercise testing for detecting spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Holter may outperform exercise testing for spontaneous VT detection in HCM; leaves open PES utility and needs prospective validation.
To determine the best way to detect serious ventricular arrhythmia in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), 15 patients with HCM performed an exercise test, had Holter monitoring during 24 hours, and programmed electrical stimulation (PES) in a randomized order, and the presence and type of ventricular arrhythmia was noted. During exercise testing, only one patient demonstrated ventricular tachycardia (VT) just prior to the test. By Holter monitoring, four patients had short episodes of asymptomatic VT. PES, using up to three extrastimuli induced VT or ventricular fibrillation (VF) in ten patients including those with VT during exercise testing and Holter monitoring. There were no differences between patients with and without ventricular arrhythmia during PES regarding age, left ventricular outflow obstruction, thickness of interventricular septum, interventricular septum/posterior wall thickness ratio, corrected QT interval, or the amplitude of the R wave in lead aVR in electrocardiography. Our results indicate that inducible VT/VF during PES is a common finding in patients with HCM. Twenty-four hour Holter monitoring was superior to exercise testing in revealing serious ventricular arrhythmia in those patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jansson et al. (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: