MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2740922010 · doi:10.1111/j.1540-8167.2005.50069.x

Tachycardia with VA Dissociation: An Unusual Tachycardia Mechanism

2005· article· en· W2740922010 sur OpenAlexaff
Lorne J. Gula, Emőke Pósán, Allan C. Skanes, Andrew D. Krahn, Raymond Yee, George J. Klein

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Établissements canadiensLondon Health Sciences Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineTachycardiaCardiologyInternal medicineIntracardiac injectionVentricleAtrial tachycardiaAnesthesiaQRS complexCatheter ablationAtrial fibrillation

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A 56-year-old man with a history of congestive heart failure and a biventricular ICD was referred for assessment of frequent episodes of antitachycardia pacing and occasional shocks for tachycardia. An EP study was performed for further assessment. During catheter manipulation in the right ventricle, tachycardia was observed (Fig. 1). At baseline, the AH interval was 100 msec and the HV interval was 50 msec at 58 bpm. Preexcitation was not demonstrated with atrial pacing, and VA conduction was absent at all cycle lengths tested. Tachycardia was easily reproduced by ventricular and atrial pacing (Fig. 2). What is the differential diagnosis of the tachycardia? ECG during tachycardia. Three beats paced from the atrium followed by tachycardia (and a 4th atrial paced beat which does not conduct to the ventricle). Note very similar QRS morphology. Intracardiac tracings are shown in Figure 3. Administration of 6 mg of intravenous adenosine consistently resulted in termination of the tachycardia. Attempts to entrain the tachycardia by right atrial pacing were unsuccessful. Catheter manipulation in the right ventricle during tachycardia resulted in transient right bundle branch block (RBBB) with delayed activation recorded at the RV apex. A premature ventricular beat was introduced at a time when the His bundle was refractory, demonstrated in Figure 4. What is the mechanism of the tachycardia determined at EP study? Intracardiac recordings during tachycardia. PVC introduced while His is refractory advances and resets tachycardia. Figure 1 demonstrates tachycardia with left bundle branch block. Dissociation of the atrium from the ventricle is evident, as P waves are visible intermittently. The differential diagnosis of a tachycardia with VA dissociation and QRS identical or at least similar to sinus rhythm includes: bundle branch reentry, interfascicular reentry, orthodromic reentrant tachycardia using a nodoventricular or nodofascicular pathway as the retrograde limb, reentry using a fasciculoventricular AP as the retrograde limb, junctional ectopic tachycardia (JET), and AV nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT). The mechanism could not be discerned without intracardiac assessment. Figure 2 illustrates the onset of tachycardia after three atrial-paced beats. The morphology of the tachycardia is identical to that of the intrinsic QRS complexes produced by atrial pacing. The onset of the tachycardia, after a paced atrial beat which does not conduct to the ventricles, may be compatible with a “two-for-one” phenomenon. The second-last atrial-paced beat may have conducted to the ventricles via a fast and also a slow anterograde pathway, resulting in two conducted beats and the onset of AVNRT. No VA conduction was present, and intracardiac recordings during tachycardia confirm dissociation of the atrium from the ventricle (Fig. 3). His bundle activation precedes ventricular activation during tachycardia, with an HV interval of 50 msec. The normal HV interval at baseline and during tachycardia makes the diagnosis of bundle branch reentry unlikely.1 Continuation of tachycardia with RBBB, as seen in Figure 3, effectively rules out this diagnosis. The observation that the right-ventricular apex was activated later during tachycardia with RBBB, suggests that the tachycardia circuit uses the normal conduction pathway as the anterograde limb of the circuit. This, along with the observation that the QRS morphology during tachycardia was identical to sinus rhythm, effectively excludes interfascicular reentry as the tachycardia mechanism. Reproducible termination of the tachycardia with adenosine generally supports participation of the AV node in the tachycardia circuit. This suggests that the mechanism is not fasciculoventricular reentry, an already unlikely diagnosis which has not been previously described.2 AVNRT can persist with exit block to the atrium.3–5 In this case, entrance block to the AV node was also demonstrated by the inability to affect the tachycardia circuit with atrial pacing. The diagnosis is now established by introduction of PVCs into the tachycardia when the His is refractory (Fig. 4). The diagnoses of AVNRT and JET are excluded by the ability to advance and reset the tachycardia with a ventricular-paced beat while the His bundle is refractory. By exclusion, the diagnosis of orthodromic reentrant tachycardia using a nodoventricular pathway as the retrograde limb was reached. As the patient had a biventricular device, the decision was made to ablate the AV junction. After ablation, no further tachycardia was inducible, and the tachycardia has subsequently not recurred. Nodoventricular connections were first postulated by Wellens6 to account for accessory atrioventricular pathways that demonstrated decremental conduction. However, many of the accessory pathways which were initially believed to be nodoventricular were in fact decremental atrioventricular or atriofascicular connections.7 This case illustrates what we believe to be a rare entity, a true nodoventricular pathway with unidirectional retrograde conduction. Participation of such a pathway as the retrograde limb of orthodromic reentrant tachycardia has been previously described.8,9 In complex cases, it is important to formulate a differential diagnosis based on observations from the 12-lead ECG and results of EP testing, and methodically test the possibility of each using appropriate maneuvers. In this case, the diagnosis was clarified by programmed electrical stimulation, the use of adenosine, and a systematic exclusion of the other possibilities in the differential diagnosis. Had administration of adenosine been inconclusive, participation of the AV node in the tachycardia could have been proven by temporary cooling of the node using a cryocatheter during tachycardia.10 Finally, ablation of the AV node with elimination of tachycardia supported the essential role of the AV node in the tachycardia mechanism. Hypothesis testing based on the differential diagnosis remains a classical method for arriving at a definitive diagnosis, with ablation providing a verification of the postulated mechanism.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Étude de cas · Signal consensuel: Étude de cas
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,007

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,006
Tête enseignante GPT0,235
Écart entre enseignants0,230 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeÉtude de cas
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2005
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Cardiovascular ElectrophysiologyMême sujetCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207