Why the study?
Do electrographic features of successful radiofrequency catheter ablation sites differ between posteroseptal and free wall accessory pathways?
Do electrographic features of successful radiofrequency catheter ablation sites differ between posteroseptal and free wall accessory pathways?
The V-delta interval and Kent potential are reliable indicators for suitable target sites in radiofrequency ablation of posteroseptal pathways, whereas atrioventricular intervals and continuous/PQS-pattern electrograms may be less reliable.
The electrographic features of successful sites of radiofrequency catheter ablation were analyzed in 33 cases of posteroseptal accessory pathways and compared with those from 155 cases of free wall accessory pathways. The atrioventricular intervals in the posteroseptal cases were significantly longer than in the free wall cases (posteroseptal vs left and right free wall; 38 vs 33 and 26 msec, respectively; p < 0.05), and the incidences of continuous electrograms (42 vs 63 and 79%; p < 0.01) and PQS-pattern unipolar electrograms (50 vs 76 and 78%; p < 0.05) were significantly lower in the posteroseptal cases. The V-delta intervals in the posteroseptal cases were significantly longer than in the left free wall cases (17 vs 13 msec; p < 0.05), but shorter than in the right free wall cases (17 vs 23 msec; p < 0.05). No statistically significant difference in the incidence of Kent potentials among the 3 groups was observed. In radiofrequency ablation of posteroseptal pathways, the length of the atrioventricular interval and the incidences of continuous electrograms and PQS-pattern unipolar electrograms may be unsatisfactory even at the appropriate target site, but the V-delta interval and Kent potential are good indicators of suitable target sites.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Soejima et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: