Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Electrophysiologic studies demonstrate that variability in A-V and V-A conduction is responsible for the different patterns of AVNRT, which can be classified into three distinct types.
Electrocardiographic and electrophysiologic studies were performed in 21 patients with atrioventricular (A-V) nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT). Patients were classified into three types according to the patterns during the tachycardia, i.e., (1) type I; an atrial echo (Ae) occurred simultaneously with a ventricular electrogram (VE) (14 patients), (2) type II; an Ae occurred in front of the next VE (four patients) and (3) type III; an Ae followed immediately after the preceding VE (three patients). All patients with type I AVNRT showed discontinuous A-V and continuous ventriculoatrial (V-A) conduction curves. "Enhanced V-A conduction" (1:1 V-A conduction at the ventricular paced rate of 200 beats/min) was demonstrated in five of the 14 and after verapamil in two of the five patients. In type II AVNRT the tachycardia was initiated with a minimal amount of A-V nodal conduction delay and second degree A-V or V-A block was observed in all four patients. V-A conduction was poor in these patients. In type III AVNRT A-V conduction curves were discontinuous and retrograde study revealed the presence of retrograde dual A-V nodal pathways. In conclusion, A-V and V-A conduction in patients with AVNRT were variable and this variability seemed to be responsible for different patterns of AVNRT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suzuki et al. (1983) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: