Focal atrial tachycardia mimicking catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia: a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In childhood and adolescence, cardiac arrhythmias are often benign in the absence of congenital heart defects. Nevertheless, life-threatening inherited arrhythmogenic syndromes can become clinically manifest in early childhood. As early symptoms may be similar in both conditions, thorough workup is fundamental to avoid delayed diagnosis and misdiagnosis. Case summary: We present the case of a 26-year-old Caucasian female patient who presented with recurrent non-sustained polymorphic wide complex tachycardia. Structural heart disease was excluded by echocardiography as well as cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Due to wide complex extrasystoles and couplets with alternating QRS axis occurring at low levels of physical exertion, catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT) was suspected and further investigated. Epinephrine testing in combination with an electrophysiological (EP) study with placement of a coronary sinus catheter and subsequent programmed stimulation ruled out CPVT and unmasked wide complex tachycardia as varying aberrant conduction of focal atrial tachycardia (FAT). 3D-navigated mapping of FAT revealed a direct parahisian origin. Due to significantly increased risk of atrio-ventricular (AV) block during ablation, the patient refused ablation and preferred medical antiarrhythmic therapy. Discussion: Given the consequences of both, delayed diagnosis and misdiagnosis of CPVT, thorough workup is fundamental. In case of doubt regarding potential aberrant AV conduction in the context of wide complex tachycardia, an invasive EP study may easily and safely prove or rule out aberrancy.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".