Key result
Left ventricular pacing demonstrated constant and progressive fusion in 100% of patients during orthodromic AVRT, whereas right ventricular pacing demonstrated fusion in 0%.
Why the study?
Does left ventricular pacing compared to right ventricular pacing demonstrate manifest entrainment in patients with orthodromic AVRT utilizing a left-sided accessory pathway?
Observational (n=6)
Does left ventricular pacing compared to right ventricular pacing demonstrate manifest entrainment in patients with orthodromic AVRT utilizing a left-sided accessory pathway?
Absolute Event Rate: 100% vs 0%
Left ventricular pacing, but not right ventricular pacing, demonstrates manifest entrainment in orthodromic AVRT with a left-sided accessory pathway due to the relationship between the pacing site and the reentrant circuit.
LV pacing may enable manifest entrainment diagnosis in left-sided AVRT; leaves open validation in prospective cohorts.
We examined entrainment by ventricular pacing in six patients during orthodromic atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (AVRT) utilizing a left-sided lateral accessory pathway. Constant fusion and progressive fusion were demonstrated in all patients by left ventricular pacing during tachycardia, but in none of the patients by right ventricular pacing. When left ventricular pacing was performed during AVRT, the antidromic wave front from the pacing impulse (n) collided with the orthodromic wave front of the previous pacing beat (n - 1) within the ventricle, therefore, constant fusion and progressive fusion were demonstrated in the surface electrocardiographic QRS complexes. On the other hand, when right ventricular pacing was performed during orthodromic AVRT, the antidromic wave front from the pacing impulse (n) collided with the orthodromic wave front of the previous paced beat (n - 1) within the normal atrioventricular pathway, and constant fusion and progressive fusion were therefore not demonstrated. These phenomena were explained by the relationship of the ventricular pacing site and the reentrant circuit. This study demonstrates the importance of the pacing site in manifest entrainment of orthodromic AVRT during ventricular pacing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suyama et al. (1992) conducted an observational in Orthodromic atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (AVRT) with left-sided lateral accessory pathway (n=6). Left ventricular pacing vs. Right ventricular pacing was evaluated on Constant fusion and progressive fusion during tachycardia. Left ventricular pacing demonstrated constant and progressive fusion in 100% of patients during orthodromic AVRT, whereas right ventricular pacing demonstrated fusion in 0%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: