Blurton Dominic J, Dubin Anne M, Chiesa Nancy A, Van Hare George F, Collins Kathryn K
Division of Cardiology, Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco, California 94143, USA.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2006 Jun;17(6):638-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2006.00452.x.
Dual atrioventricular (AV) nodal physiology, defined as an AH jump > or =50 msec with a 10 msec decrease in A1A2, is the substrate for atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) and yet it is present in a minority of pediatric patients with AVNRT. Our objective was to characterize dual AV nodal physiology as it pertains to a pediatric population.
METHODS/RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed invasive electrophysiology studies in 92 patients with AVNRT (age12.1 +/- 3.7 yrs) and in 46 controls without AVNRT (age 13.3 +/- 3.7 yrs). Diagnoses in controls: syncope (N = 31), palpitations (N = 6), atrial flutter (N = 3), history of atrial tachycardia with no inducible arrhythmia (N = 3), and ventricular tachycardia (N = 3). General anesthesia was used in 49% of AVNRT and 52% of controls, P = 0.86. There were no differences in PR, AH, HV, or AV block cycle length. With A1A2 atrial stimulation, AVNRT patients had a significantly longer maximum AH achieved (324 +/- 104 msec vs 255 +/- 67 msec, P = 0.001), and a shorter AVNERP (276 +/- 49 msec vs 313 +/- 68 msec P = 0.0005). An AH jump > or =50 msec was found in 42% of AVNRT versus 30% of controls (P = 0.2). Using a ROC graph we found that an AH jump of any size is a poor predictor of AVNRT. With atrial overdrive pacing, PR > or = RR was seen more commonly in AVNRT versus controls, (55/91(60%) vs 6/46 (13%) P = 0.000).
Neither the common definition of dual AV nodes or redefining an AH jump as some value <50 msec are reliable methods to define dual AV nodes or to predict AVNRT in pediatric patients. PR > or = RR is a relatively good predictor of AVNRT.
双房室(AV)结生理,定义为AH间期跃变≥50毫秒且A1A2间期缩短10毫秒,是房室结折返性心动过速(AVNRT)的基础,但仅少数患有AVNRT的儿科患者存在这种情况。我们的目的是描述与儿科人群相关的双房室结生理特征。
方法/结果:我们回顾性分析了92例AVNRT患者(年龄12.1±3.7岁)和46例无AVNRT的对照者(年龄13.3±3.7岁)的有创电生理研究。对照者的诊断包括:晕厥(n = 31)、心悸(n = 6)、心房扑动(n = 3)、有房性心动过速病史但未诱发心律失常(n = 3)以及室性心动过速(n = 3)。49%的AVNRT患者和52%的对照者使用了全身麻醉,P = 0.86。PR、AH、HV或房室传导阻滞周期长度无差异。在进行A1A2心房刺激时,AVNRT患者达到的最大AH间期显著更长(324±104毫秒对255±67毫秒,P = 0.001),且房室结有效不应期(AVNERP)更短(276±49毫秒对313±68毫秒,P = 0.0005)。42%的AVNRT患者与30%的对照者出现AH间期跃变≥50毫秒(P = 0.2)。使用ROC曲线我们发现,任何大小的AH间期跃变对AVNRT的预测价值都很低。在进行心房超速起搏时,AVNRT患者中PR≥RR更为常见(55/91(60%)对6/46(13%),P = 0.000)。
无论是双房室结的常用定义还是将AH间期跃变重新定义为小于50毫秒的某个值,都不是定义双房室结或预测儿科患者AVNRT的可靠方法。PR≥RR是AVNRT相对较好的数据预测指标。