Key result
Burst atrial pacing and programmed atrial stimulation induced an AH jump in 81% and 78% of AVNRT patients, respectively, and their combination proved diagnostic of dual AV nodal physiology in 95.8% of cases.
Why the study?
Does burst atrial pacing correlate with programmed atrial stimulation for inducing an AH jump to diagnose dual AV nodal physiology in patients with AVNRT?
Observational (n=304)
No
Does burst atrial pacing correlate with programmed atrial stimulation for inducing an AH jump to diagnose dual AV nodal physiology in patients with AVNRT?
Combining burst and programmed atrial stimulation proves diagnostic for dual AV nodal physiology in 95.8% of patients with AVNRT.
Supports combined burst and programmed atrial pacing to diagnose dual AV nodal physiology in AVNRT; hypothesis-generating pending prospective validation.
PURPOSE: To study the correlation between the sudden prolongations of the atrio-Hisian (AH) interval with ≥50 ms during burst and programmed atrial stimulation, and to define whether the AH jump during burst atrial pacing is a reliable diagnostic criterion for dual AV nodal physiology. METHODS: Retrospective data on 304 patients with preliminary ECG diagnosis of AV nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT), confirmed during electrophysiological study, was analyzed for the presence of AH jump during burst and programmed atrial stimulation, and for correlation between the pacing modes for inducing the jump. Wilcoxon signed-ranks test and Spearman's bivariate correlation coefficient were applied, significant was P-value <0.05. RESULTS: The population was aged 48.5 ± 15.7 (12-85) years; males were 38.5%. AH jump occurred during burst atrial pacing in 81% of the patients, and during programmed stimulation - in 78%, P = 0.366. In 63.2% AH jump was induced by both pacing modes; in 17.8% - only by burst pacing; in 14.8% - only by programmed pacing; in 4.2% there was no inducible jump. There was negative correlation between both pacing modes, ρ = -0.204, Р<0.001. CONCLUSION: Burst and programmed atrial stimulation separately prove the presence of dual AV nodal physiology in 81 and 78% of the patients with AVNRT, respectively. There is negative correlation between the two pacing modes, allowing the combination of the two methods to prove diagnostic in 95.8% of the patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bayraktarova et al. (2017) conducted an observational in Atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) (n=304). Burst atrial pacing vs. Programmed atrial stimulation was evaluated on Induction of atrio-Hisian (AH) jump ≥50 ms (p=0.366). Burst atrial pacing and programmed atrial stimulation induced an AH jump in 81% and 78% of AVNRT patients, respectively, and their combination proved diagnostic of dual AV nodal physiology in 95.8% of cases.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: