Why the study?
There are minimal data regarding antegrade-only accessory pathways in young patients amid evolving recommendations and treatments.
What are the clinical and electrophysiologic properties of antegrade-only accessory pathways in children and adolescents compared to bidirectional pathways?
What are the clinical and electrophysiologic properties of antegrade-only accessory pathways in children and adolescents compared to bidirectional pathways?
Antegrade-only accessory pathways in young patients have similar rates of high-risk conduction properties as bidirectional pathways and often present with a second tachycardia substrate, necessitating comprehensive electrophysiology evaluation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Similar high-risk prevalence supports equivalent caution for antegrade-only pathways in youth; leaves open need for prospective validation.
There is minimal data regarding antegrade-only accessory pathways in young patients. Given evolving recommendations and treatments, retrospective analysis of the clinical and electrophysiologic properties of antegrade-only pathways in patients <21 years old was performed, with subsequent comparison of electrophysiology properties to age-matched controls with bidirectional pathways. Of 522 consecutive young patients with ventricular pre-excitation referred for electrophysiology study, 33 (6.3%) had antegrade-only accessory pathways. Indications included palpitations (47%), chest pain (25%), and syncope (22%). The shortest value for either the accessory pathway effective refractory period or the pre-excited R-R interval was taken for each patient, with the median of the antegrade-only group significantly greater than shortest values for the bidirectional group (310 [280-360] ms versus 270 [240-302] ms, p < 0.001). However, the prevalence of pathways with high-risk properties (effective refractory period or shortest pre-excited R-R interval <250 ms) was similar in both study patients and controls (13% versus 21%) (p = 0.55). Sixteen patients had a single antegrade-only accessory pathway and no inducible arrhythmia. Six patients had Mahaim fibres, all right anterolateral with inducible antidromic reciprocating tachycardia. However, 11 patients with antegrade-only accessory pathways and 3 with Mahaim fibres had inducible tachycardia due to a second substrate recognised at electrophysiology study. These included concealed accessory pathways (7), bidirectional accessory pathways (5), and atrioventricular node re-entry (2). Antegrade-only accessory pathways require comprehensive electrophysiology evaluation as confounding factors such as high-risk conduction properties or inducible Supraventricular Tachycardia (SVT) due to a second substrate of tachycardia are often present.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: