Key result
Programmed ventricular stimulation induced VT in 67% of coronary artery disease patients with prior VT vs 18% without (p<0.01), but showed no difference in dilated cardiomyopathy (18% vs 15%).
Why the study?
Does programmed ventricular stimulation predict sudden cardiac death or correlate with clinical ventricular tachycardia differently in patients with coronary artery disease versus dilated cardiomyopathy?
Cohort (n=100)
Does programmed ventricular stimulation predict sudden cardiac death or correlate with clinical ventricular tachycardia differently in patients with coronary artery disease versus dilated cardiomyopathy?
Absolute Event Rate: 67% vs 18%
p-value: p=<0.01
Programmed ventricular stimulation has different diagnostic yields in coronary artery disease versus dilated cardiomyopathy, but its prognostic value for sudden cardiac death remains uncertain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
PVS inducibility differs by substrate but should not guide decisions in DCM; leaves open its prognostic value versus CAD.
Gonska et al. (1987) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease and dilated cardiomyopathy (n=100). Programmed ventricular stimulation vs. Patients without clinical ventricular tachycardia was evaluated on Ventricular tachycardia inducibility in coronary artery disease patients with vs without prior clinical VT (p=<0.01). Programmed ventricular stimulation induced VT in 67% of coronary artery disease patients with prior VT vs 18% without (p<0.01), but showed no difference in dilated cardiomyopathy (18% vs 15%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: