Concealed Accessory Pathways with a Single Ventricular and Two Discrete Atrial Insertion Sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atrioventricular reciprocating tachycardia (AVRT) utilizing a concealed accessory pathway is common. It is well appreciated that some patients may have multiple accessory pathways with separate atrial and ventricular insertion sites. METHODS: We present three cases of AVRT utilizing concealed pathways with evidence that each utilizing a single ventricular insertion and two discrete atrial insertion sites. RESULTS: In case one, two discrete atrial insertion sites were mapped in two separate procedures, and only during the second ablation was the Kent potential identified. Ablation of the Kent potential at this site remote from the two atrial insertion sites resulted in the termination of the retrograde conduction in both pathways. Case two presented with supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) with alternating eccentric atrial activation patterns without alteration in the tachycardia cycle length. The two distinct atrial insertion sites during orthodromic AVRT and ventricular pacing were targeted and each of the two atrial insertion sites were successfully mapped and ablated. In case three, retrograde decremental conduction utilizing both atrial insertion sites was identified prior to ablation. After mapping and ablation of the first discrete atrial insertion site, tachycardia persisted utilizing the second atrial insertion site. Only after ablation of the second atrial insertion site was SVT noninducible, and VA conduction was no longer present. CONCLUSIONS: Concealed retrograde accessory pathways with discrete atrial insertion sites may have a common ventricular insertion site. Identification and ablation of the ventricular insertion site or the separate discrete atrial insertion sites result in successful treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".