Carmona PR, Chávez GE, Rosa FFJ, Ramos RRR, Padrón PG, Cruz EJM, Rodríguez LA

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page: 180-184
PDF size: 103.44 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction and objectives: There are algorithms such as Brugada and Vereckei-2 for diagnosis of ventricular tachycardia, but they have not been explored in specific series of patients with idiopathic ventricular tachycardia. The purpose of this research was to identify in our series, by simple analysis, the scheme of greater diagnostic performance of the Brugada and Vereckei-2 algorithms. Method: Retrospective and descriptive study in 15 consecutive patients presenting with idiopathic ventricular tachycardia, confirmed by electrophysiological study and other tests at the Cardiac Electrophysiology Service of Cardiocentro "Ernesto Che Guevara" in Santa Clara, Cuba, between January 2004 – Decem-ber 2007. Results: Both algorithms diagnosed 100% of cases. In patients with right ventricle outflow tract ventricular tachycardia, the Brugada algorithm diagnosed 50% of cases in step 1, and 83.3% combined with Step 3. The Vereckei-2 algorithm in the first two steps did not diagnose any right ventricle outflow tract ventricular tachycardia. In fascicular right ventricle outflow tract ventricular tachycardia, the Brugada algorithm step 1 only diagnosed 11.1% of cases and none in step 2. The Vereckei-2 algorithm, step 2, has a high diagnostic performance for fascicular ventricular tachycardia: 88.9% of cases. Conclusions: The Vereckei-2 algorithm has greater usefulness in fascicular ventricular tachycardia, with a high diagnostic performance in a single step (step 2). Brugada algorithm, despite having lower diagnostic performance in a single step, has greater usefulness in the diagnosis of right ventricle outflow tract ventricular tachycardia by combining steps 1 and 3.

REFERENCES

1. Berruezo A, Zeljko HM, Bartrons J, Mayol J, Prada F, Brugada J. Defibrillation threshold decrease with the supradiaphragmatic extracardiac implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation technique. Europace. 2010;12(11):1649-51.

2. Schneider HE, Kriebel T, Jung K, Gravenhorst VD, Paul T. Catheter ablation of idiopathic left and right ventricular tachycardias in the pediatric population using noncontact mapping. Heart Rhythm. 2010; 7(6):731-9.

3. Yokoshiki H, Mitsuyama H, Ueno M, Tsutsui H. Idiopathic reentrant right ventricular outflow tract tachycardia with presystolic potential of central pathway. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2010;21(10): 1174-7.

4. Ceresnak SR, Liberman L, Avasarala K, Tanel R, Motonaga KS, Dubin AM. Are wide complex tachycardia algorithms applicable in children and patients with congenital heart disease? J Electro-cardiol. 2010;43(6):694-700.

5. Brugada P, Brugada J, Mont L, Smeets J, Andries EW. A new approach to the differential diagnosis of a regular tachycardia with a wide QRS complex. Circulation. 1991;83(5):1649-59.

6. Vereckei A, Duray G, Szénási G, Altemose GT, Miller JM. Application of a new algorithm in the diffe-rential diagnosis of wide QRS complex tachycardia. Eur Heart J. 2007;28(5):589-600.

7. Vereckei A, Duray G, Szénási G, Altemose GT, Miller JM. New algoritm usin only lead aVR for differential diagnosis of wide QRS complex tachy-cardia. Heart Rhythm. 2008;5(1):89-98.

8. Kireyev D, Arkhipov MV, Zador ST, Paris JA, Boden WE. Clinical utility of aVR-the neglected electrocar-diographic lead. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2010;15(2):175-80.

9. Alzand BS, Crijns HJ. Diagnostic criteria of broad QRS complex tachycardia: decades of evolution. Europace. 2011;13(4):465-72.

10. Sethi KK, Singh B, Kalra GS, Mohan JC, Jolly N, Arora R, et al. Verapamil responsive ventricular ta-chycardia: clinical and electrophysiologic charac-teristics. Indian Heart J. 1991;43(6):437-43.

11. Frey B, Kreiner G, Fritsch S, Veit F, Gössinger HD. Successful treatment of idiopathic left ventricular outflow tract tachycardia by catheter ablation or minimally invasive surgical cryoablation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2000;23(5):870-6.