Why the study?
Many 12-lead ECG algorithms have been proposed for localizing accessory pathways in Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome with varied levels of difficulty and accuracy, prompting a comparison guided by successful ablation sites.
How do three different 12-lead ECG algorithms compare in predicting the location of accessory pathways in patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome?
How do three different 12-lead ECG algorithms compare in predicting the location of accessory pathways in patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome?
Different 12-lead ECG algorithms have varying sensitivities and specificities for localizing accessory pathways in WPW syndrome, with Arruda & d'Avila being most effective for left-sided pathways and d'Avila or the proposed algorithm best for right-sided pathways.
ECG algorithm selection may optimize site-specific localization in WPW; leaves open need for prospective validation before practice change.
Background: Wolff-Parkinson-White (WPW) syndrome, a pre-excitation condition that develops in 0.1-0.3% of the overall population, is brought on by the existence of an accessory atrioventricular circuit. With varied levels of difficulty and accuracy, many algorithms have been put forward for localizing accessory pathway (AP) utilizing 12-lead ECG analysis. This study aimed to compare between three algorithms in predicting where the accessory circuit is located in individuals with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome using a 12-lead surface ECG guided by successful ablation site. Methods: The research included 100 people with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome and was prospective cross-sectional in design. The patients were presented to the arrhythmia clinics at the Cardiology Departments in Tanta University Hospitals and Ain Shams University Hospitals (El-Demerdash hospital) and who were planned for electrophysiological study and radiofrequency ablation between July 2019 and July 2021. The ECG was analyzed and compared using the three selected algorithms and fluoroscopy was used to identify the location of a successful ablation at the time of catheter ablation. A complete electrophysiological study was done for exact localization of the accessory pathway. Results: No major difference between the three algorithms in total accuracy was found, but as regard different AP locations, there was difference in sensitivity and specificity for each location between the three algorithms. Conclusions: Arruda & d'Avila's approach was the most effective at predicting left-sided accessory pathways, while d'Avila then our proposed algorithm were the best algorithms for prediction of accessory pathways at right-sided. The best algorithms for detection of anteroseptal and mid-septal accessory pathways were our proposed algorithm and Arruda.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Roshdy et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: