Key result
The Steurer algorithm and VT score demonstrated high specificities of 97.6% and 96.1% for diagnosing VT in preexcitation, outperforming the Brugada and aVR algorithms.
Why the study?
Do specific ECG algorithms (such as the Steurer algorithm and VT score) provide high specificity for differentiating ventricular tachycardia from preexcited SVT in patients with ventricular preexcitation?
Observational (n=329)
Do specific ECG algorithms (such as the Steurer algorithm and VT score) provide high specificity for differentiating ventricular tachycardia from preexcited SVT in patients with ventricular preexcitation?
The Steurer algorithm and VT score provide high specificity for differentiating ventricular tachycardia from preexcited SVT, preventing the overdiagnosis of VT in patients with preexcitation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Algorithms with high specificity may support cautious VT diagnosis in preexcited wide QRS tachycardia; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Despite substantial progress in the field of differentiation between ventricular tachycardia (VT) and supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) with wide QRS complexes, differentiation between VT and preexcited SVT remains largely unresolved due to significant overlap in QRS morphology. Our aim was to assess the specificities of various single ECG criteria and sets of criteria (Brugada algorithm, aVR algorithm, Steurer algorithm, and the VT score) for diagnosis of VT in a sizable cohort of patients with preexcitation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of consecutive accessory pathway ablation procedures to identify preexcited tachycardias. Among 670 accessory pathway ablation procedures, 329 cases with good quality ECG with either bona fide preexcited SVT (n = 30) or a surrogate preexcited SVT (fast paced atrial rhythm with full preexcitation, n = 299) were identified. ECGs were analyzed with the use of wide QRS complex algorithms/criteria to determine specificities of these methods. RESULTS: The Steurer algorithm and VT score (≥3 points), with specificities of 97.6% and 96.1%, respectively, were significantly (p < .01) more specific for the diagnosis of VT than Brugada algorithm, aVR algorithm, and Pava criterion with specificities of 31%, 11.6%, and 57.1%, respectively. The first step of the Brugada algorithm and the first step of the aVR algorithm had also high specificities of 93.3% and 96.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: There are sufficient electrocardiographical differences between VT and preexcited SVT to allow electrocardiographic differentiation. VT score, Steurer algorithm, and some single criteria do not overdiagnose VT in patients with preexcitation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jastrzębski et al. (2017) conducted an observational in Ventricular preexcitation (n=329). Steurer algorithm and VT score vs. Brugada algorithm, aVR algorithm, and Pava criterion was evaluated on Specificity for the diagnosis of ventricular tachycardia (p=<0.01). The Steurer algorithm and VT score demonstrated high specificities of 97.6% and 96.1% for diagnosing VT in preexcitation, outperforming the Brugada and aVR algorithms.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: