Usefulness of the intracardiac electrocardiogram recorded using central venous catheters on P-wave magnification.

BACKGROUND: The detection of atrial electrical activity is extremely valuable in recognizing complex cardiac arrhythmias. However, P-wave detection on a surface electrocardiogram (S-ECG) can sometimes be challenging. The intracardiac electrocardiogram (IC-ECG), recorded by a central venous catheter loaded with saline solution, has proven to be a safe and effective method for amplifying atrial electrical activity. We aim to compare the P-wave amplitude recorded in the S-ECG and the IC-ECG in different venous accesses, catheters, heart rhythms, and atrial dimensions. METHODS: We compared the P wave amplitude obtained by the IC-ECG and the S-ECG recordings from cardiac intensive care unit patients. RESULTS: In 109 nonconsecutive patients, a total of 166 IC-ECG were collected. The median amplitude of the P wave was 0.1 (0.083-0.3) mV in the S-ECG and 0.4 (0.25-2.4) mV in the IC-ECG; p < 0.001. This difference remained significant regardless of the patient's heart rhythm, left atrial dimension, and catheter or vascular access used. CONCLUSION: The IC-ECG acquired using central venous catheters significantly increases atrial electrical activity signals. This technique might help identify complex cardiac arrhythmias.

Differences in pacemaker programming between electrophysiology specialists and other physicians.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate programming of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) is essential to ensure adequate function and avoid harmful effects. In underdeveloped countries, CIED monitoring and programming are often performed by physicians involved in their implantation. However, many of them often do not have sufficient training in CIED programming. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the differences in pacemaker programming between electrophysiology (EP) specialists and other physicians. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed changes in pacemaker programming performed by an EP specialist in patients who attended for pacemaker evaluation and reported previous follow-ups by a non-EP specialist. RESULTS: Among 58 patients (26 males), 41 patients (71%) had programming errors and required setting modifications. The rate adaptative pacing function (R-mode) was incorrectly deactivated in 9 patients (15%) and improperly activated in 2 patients (3%). Unnecessary ventricular stimulation was detected in 23 patients (40%) with a pacing burden of 60% (32-95%). The lower rate limit was unnecessarily high in 12 patients (21%). Atrial or ventricular pacing output was inappropriate in 15 patients (26%) and was consequently modified (4 patients unnecessarily high, 9 patients below requirements). The auto-adapted pacing output was switched off in 17 of 18 patients (16 due to physician's preference, and 1 due to algorithm inaccuracy). The programmed sensitivity was inaccurate in 2 patients (3%). In 2 patients (3%) switching from DDDR to VVIR mode was required. CONCLUSION: We found a high prevalence of errors in pacemaker programming by non-EP specialists. An EP specialist should always be responsible for CIED follow-up.

Comportamiento del tiempo de conducción retrógrada al momento de la inducción de las taquicardias supraventriculares y su rol en el diagnóstico diferencial / Behavior of Retrograde Conduction Time at Supraventricular Tachycardia Induction and its Role in Differential Diagnosis

RESUMEN Antecedentes : El diagnóstico diferencial entre la taquicardia reentrante ortodrómica (TRO) y la taquicardia por reentrada nodal atípica (TRNa) puede ser dificultoso. Nuestra hipótesis es que las TRNa tienen más variabilidad en el tiempo de con ducción retrógrada al comienzo de la taquicardia que las TRO. Nuestros objetivos fueron evaluar la variabilidad en el tiempo de conducción retrógrada al inicio de la taquicardia en TRNa y TRO, y proponer una nueva herramienta diagnóstica para diferenciar estas dos arritmias. Métodos : Se midió el intervalo ventrículo-auricular (VA) de los primeros latidos tras la inducción de la taquicardia, hasta su estabilización. La diferencia entre el intervalo VA máximo y el mínimo se definió como delta VA (ΔVA). También contamos el número de latidos necesarios para que se estabilice el intervalo VA. Se excluyeron las taquicardias auriculares. Resultados : Se incluyeron 101 pacientes. Se diagnosticó TRO en 64 pacientes y TRNa en 37. El ΔVA fue 0 (rango intercuartílico, RIC, 0-5) milisegundos (ms) en la TRO frente a 40 (21-55) ms en la TRNa (p < 0,001). El intervalo VA se estabilizó significativamente antes en la TRO (1,5 [1-3] latidos) que en la TRNa (5 [4-7] latidos; p < 0,001). Un ΔVA < 10 ms diagnosticó TRO con 100% de sensibilidad, especificidad y valores predictivos positivo y negativo. La estabilización del intervalo VA en menos de 3 latidos predijo TRO con buena precisión diagnóstica. Los resultados fueron similares considerando sólo vías accesorias septales. Las TRN típicas tuvieron una variación intermedia. Conclusión : Un ΔVA < 10 ms es un criterio simple, que distingue con precisión la TRO de la TRNa, independientemente de la localización de la vía accesoria.

ABSTRACT Background : Differential diagnosis between orthodromic reentrant tachycardia (ORT) and atypical nodal reentrant tachy cardia (ANRT) can be challenging. Our hypothesis was that ANRT presents more variability in retrograde conduction time at tachycardia onset than ORT. Objectives : The objectives of this study were to assess retrograde conduction time variability at the start of tachycardia in ANRT and ORT, and postulate a new diagnostic tool to differentiate these two types of arrhythmias. Methods : The ventriculoatrial (VA) interval of the first beats after tachycardia induction was measured until stabilization. The difference between the maximum and minimum VA interval was defined as delta VA (ΔVA), and the number of beats needed for VA interval stabilization was also assessed. Atrial tachycardias were excluded. Results : In a total of 101 patients included in the study, ORT was diagnosed in 64 patients and ANRT in 37. ΔVA interval was 0 (interquartile range [IQR] 0-5) milliseconds (ms) in ORT vs. 40 (21-55) ms in ANRT (p <0.001). The VA interval significantly stabilized earlier in ORT (1.5 [1-3] beats) than in ANRT (5 [4-7] beats) (p<0.001). A ΔVA <10 ms diagnosed ORT with 100% sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Ventriculoatrial interval stabilization in less than 3 beats predicted ORT with good diagnostic accuracy. The results were similar considering only accessory septal pathways. Typical NRTs presented an intermediate variation. Conclusion : Presence of DVA <10 ms is a simple criterion that accurately differentiates ORT from ANRT, independently of the accessory pathway localization.

Variability of the VA interval at tachycardia induction: a simple method to differentiate orthodromic reciprocating tachycardia from atypical atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia.

BACKGROUND: The differential diagnosis between orthodromic atrioventricular reentry tachycardia (AVRT) and atypical AV nodal reentrant tachycardia (aAVNRT) is sometimes challenging. We hypothesize that aAVNRTs have more variability in the retrograde conduction time at tachycardia onset than AVRTs. METHODS: We aimed to assess the variability in retrograde conduction time at tachycardia onset in AVRT and aAVNRT and to propose a new diagnostic tool to differentiate these two arrhythmia mechanisms. We measured the VA interval of the first beats after tachycardia induction until it stabilized. The difference between the maximum and minimum VA intervals (∆VA) and the number of beats needed for the VA interval to stabilize was analyzed. Atrial tachycardias were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients with aAVNRT (n = 37) or AVRT (n = 64) were included. Six additional patients with decremental accessory pathway-mediated tachycardia (DAPT) were analyzed separately. All aAVNRTs had VA interval variability. The median ∆VA was 0 (0 - 5) ms in AVRTs vs 40 (21 - 55) ms in aAVNRTs (p < 0.001). The VA interval stabilized significantly earlier in AVRTs (median 1.5 [1 - 3] beats) than in aAVNRTs (5 [4 - 7] beats; p < 0.001). A ∆VA < 10 ms accurately differentiated AVRT from aAVNRT with 100% of sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. The stabilization of the VA interval at < 3 beats of the tachycardia onset identified AVRT with sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of 64.1%, 94.6%, 95.3%, and 60.3%, respectively. A ∆VA < 20 ms yielded good diagnostic accuracy for DAPT. CONCLUSIONS: A ∆VA < 10 ms is a simple and useful criterion that accurately distinguished AVRT from atypical AVNRT. Central panel: Scatter plot showing individual values of ∆VA in atypical AVNRT and AVRT. Left panel: induction of atypical AVNRT. The VA interval stabilizes at the 5th beat and the ∆VA is 62 ms (maximum VA interval: 172 ms - minimum VA interval: 110 ms). Right panel: induction of AVRT. The tachycardia has a fixed VA interval from the first beat. ∆VA is 0 ms.

Value of Electrocardiography to Distinguish Fabry Disease from Sarcomeric Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.

Fabry disease (FD) is a rare genetic disorder that leads to left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), frequently misdiagnosed as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). We sought to assess the value of electrocardiography for distinguishing FD from HCM. We retrospectively reviewed and compared standard electrocardiograms and echocardiograms from 26 patients with FD and LVH and 33 sarcomeric patients with HCM, matched for gender, age, and degree of LVH. The mean age of patients with FD was 46 years (interquartile range) (28 to 53) and of HCM 50 (30 to 61) years (p = 0.27). Of them, 16 (61%) and 25 (76%) were male, respectively (p = 0.26). Indexed left ventricular mass was 166 g/m2 in FD versus 181 g/m2 in HCM (p = 0.88). All patients with FD and 30 (91%) with HCM were in sinus rhythm (p = 0.25). A higher prevalence of right bundle branch block (RBBB) was observed in FD (27%) versus HCM (6%) (p = 0.03). The PR interval was shorter in FD, 140 ms (120-160) versus 160 ms (140 to 180) (p = 0.004). P-wave duration was longer in patients with FD, 100 ms (80 to 120) versus 80 ms (80 to 100) (p = 0.01). The PQ interval (PR interval minus P-wave duration) was shorter in patients with FD, 40 ms (20 to 45) versus 80 ms (40 to 80) (p = 0.001). There were no differences regarding P-wave amplitude, QRS complex duration, corrected QT length, conduction or repolarization abnormalities, Sokolow-Lyon index, and Cornell index. After multivariate adjustments for RBBB, PR interval, P-wave duration, and PQ interval, a PQ interval ≤40 ms and RBBB were significantly associated with FD. In conclusion, there are electrocardiogram characteristics, such as the presence of RBBB or a PQ interval ≤40 ms, that may be helpful for screening and reducing the delay in FD diagnosis.

[Cilostazol and sick sinus syndrome]. / Efecto del cilostazol en la enfermedad del nodo sinusal.

Here we present the case of a 60-year-old patient with sinus node disease (NSS), symptomatic with dizziness and angor. The electrocardiogram showed episodes of sinus pauses with nodal escapes. During hospitalization, pending the placement of a definitive pacemaker, cilostazol (100 mg every 12 hours orally) was indicated, observing an increase in heart rate 48 hours after starting the medication, and the disappearance of sinus pauses in the 24 hours Holter. Our objective has been to show that cilostazol can be useful in patients with SNN, although long-term chronotropic effects of this treatment has yet to be evaluated.

Se presenta el caso de una paciente de 60 años con enfermedad del nodo sinusal (ENS), sintomática con mareos y ángor, con electrocardiograma que evidenciaba episodios de pausas sinusales con escapes nodales. Durante la internación, a la espera de colocación de marcapaso definitivo, se indicó cilostazol (100 mg cada 12 h vía oral), observando a las 48 horas del inicio un incremento en la frecuencia cardíaca y la desaparición de las pausas sinusales en Holter de 24 horas. Nue stro objetivo ha sido demostrar que el cilostazol puede ser útil en pacientes con ENS, aunque es necesario evaluar los efectos cronotrópicos a largo plazo de este tratamiento.

Efecto del cilostazol en la enfermedad del nodo sinusal / Cilostazol and sick sinus syndrome

Resumen Se presenta el caso de una paciente de 60 años con enfermedad del nodo sinusal (ENS), sintomática con mareos y ángor, con electrocardiograma que evidenciaba episodios de pausas sinusales con escapes nodales. Durante la internación, a la espera de colocación de marcapaso definitivo, se indicó cilostazol (100 mg cada 12 h vía oral), observando a las 48 horas del inicio un incremento en la frecuencia cardíaca y la desaparición de las pausas sinusales en Holter de 24 horas. Nuestro objetivo ha sido demostrar que el cilostazol puede ser útil en pacientes con ENS, aunque es necesario evaluar los efectos cronotrópicos a largo plazo de este tratamiento.

Abstract Here we present the case of a 60-year-old patient with sinus node disease (NSS), symptomatic with dizziness and angor. The electrocardiogram showed episodes of sinus pauses with nodal escapes. During hospitalization, pending the placement of a definitive pacemaker, cilostazol (100 mg every 12 hours orally) was indicated, observing an increase in heart rate 48 hours after starting the medication, and the disappearance of sinus pauses in the 24 hours Holter. Our objective has been to show that cilostazol can be useful in patients with SNN, although long-term chronotropic effects of this treatment has yet to be evaluated.