Why the study?
Do specific ECG indices accurately diagnose idiopathic short-coupled ventricular tachyarrhythmias?
Do specific ECG indices accurately diagnose idiopathic short-coupled ventricular tachyarrhythmias?
A coupling interval < 400 ms and a coupling interval/QT < 1 provide highly sensitive and specific diagnostic criteria for idiopathic short-coupled ventricular tachyarrhythmias.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
ECG coupling interval <400 ms enables accurate diagnosis of short-coupled VT; confirms reliability of these indices from systematic validation.
INTRODUCTION: Idiopathic short-coupled ventricular tachyarrhythmias make up a considerable proportion of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in structurally normal hearts and are the cause of 5-10% of unexpected sudden cardiac deaths. There is disparity in the literature regarding their description and a lack of formal diagnostic criteria to define them. OBJECTIVE: . METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of all published studies describing short-coupled torsades de pointes, idiopathic ventricular fibrillation and polymorphic ventricular tachycardia. Published tracings were analysed using a standard set of criteria to define the different ECG intervals. Previously proposed diagnostic indices were validated using a control group of previously published long-coupled torsades de pointes cases. RESULTS: Validation of the ECG indices revealed that a coupling interval < 400 ms was the most reliable measurement (sensitivity 100%, specificity 97%), followed by a coupling interval/QT < 1 (sensitivity 96%, specificity 100%). CONCLUSION: Idiopathic short-coupled ventricular tachyarrhythmias encompass all previous descriptions of this tachyarrhythmia including idiopathic ventricular fibrillation, short-coupled torsades de pointes, Purkinje-related torsades de pointes and idiopathic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia. This arrhythmia can be diagnosed by newly proposed criteria with high sensitivity and specificity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Almehairi et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: