Electrophysiologic Factors Responsible for the Induction of AV Nodal Reentrant Tachycardia.
- Author:
Jeong Gwan CHO
1
;
Soon Chul SHIN
;
Jay Young RHEW
;
Youl BAE
;
Jun Woo KIM
;
Sung Hee KIM
;
Ju Han KIM
;
Jeong Pyeong SEO
;
Gwang Su CHA
;
Jong Chul PARK
;
Myung Ho JEONG
;
Jong Chun PARK
;
Jung Chaee KANG
Author Information
1. Department of Cardiology, Chonnam University Hospital, Kwnagju, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
AVNRT;
Induction;
Concealed conduction
- MeSH:
Catheter Ablation;
Humans;
Tachycardia, Atrioventricular Nodal Reentry*
- From:Korean Journal of Medicine
1997;52(6):786-796
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVES: Although a subtle balance between conduction time of the antgrade slow pathway and refractory period of the retrograde fast pathway is known to play the most critical role in the induction of AV nodal reentrant tachycardia(AVNRT), other electrophysiologic factors such as concealed conduction in to the fast pathway have been suggested to be responsible. The present study was performed to determine the electrophysiologic factors responsible for the induction of AVNRT. METHODS: Total 34 subjects undergoing electrophysiologic study(EPS) including 9 normal subjects(SAVNP), 7 subjects with dual AV nodal pathways(DAVNP) but no inducible AVNBT, and 18 inducible AVNRT patients were included in this study. EPS was performed using the conventional technique. To evaluate the presence of concealed conduction into the fast AV nodal pathway(FP) and its effects on the effective refractory period(ERP) of the FP (FP-ERP) to a subsequent impulse, single(A2) and double atrial extrastimuli(A2A3) were given. FP-ERP of conducted A2 [FP-ERP-A2(+)] was measured with a second atrial extrastimulus(A3) following a first atrial extrastimulus(A2), which was delivered at a coupling interval 20-30ms longer than FP-ERP. ERPs of non-conducted A2 [FP-ERP-A(-)] was measured with A3 following A2 at coupling intervals 20 ms shorter than FP-ERP. Concealed conduction was considered to be present when A1A3 interval of A3 blocked at the FP with a longest A2A3 interval was longer than FP-ERP. Concealment index(CI)-1 and CI-2 were calculated by dividing FP-ERP-A2(-) by FP-ERP-A2(+) and FP-ERP, respectively. In addition, relationship between antegrade slow pathway conduction time(A2H2) and retrograde fast pathway conduction time(HA), retrograde AV conduction system block cycle length(VA-BCL), and retrograde AV conduction system EBP(VA-ERP) was evaluated by a regression analysis. RESULTS: Concealed conduction was present in all the subjects. CI-1 was 0.63 +/- 0.04 and CI-2, 0.79 +/- 0.04 in SAVNP and 0.67 +/- 0.11, 0.68 +/- 0.07 respectively, in AVNRT patients in whom the antegrade slow pathway(SP) was ablated with catheter ablation, showing no significant difference in CI between 2 groups. At the time of induction of AVNRT with A2, A2H2. was significantly correlated with FP-ERP and FP-CT(r=OA43, p=0.04; r=0.507, p=0,02, respectively). By multivariate regression analysis, it was derived that A2H2 should be greater than "0.79 FP-ERP+1.57 FP-CT-0.44 HA-190(ms)" (r=0.71, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Induction of typical AVNRT with A2 is determined by conduction time of the slow pathway, refractory period and conduction velocity of the fast pathway, and concealed conduction into the fast pathway.
