Clinical profile and electrophysiological characteristics of atypical atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia: A decade's experience.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical features and inducibility characteristics of atypical atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) and compare it with typical AVNRT.

BACKGROUND

AVNRT is the commonest form of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. The mechanism of AVNRT is very varied. Several classification systems evolved with better understanding but a simplified approach of classification into typical and atypical AVNRT is justifiable and clinically more relevant. In our study, we have assessed the epidemiological profile of atypical AVNRT in a single institute over 10 years and analysed pertinent electrophysiological characteristics.

METHOD

In this retrospective observational single center study we analysed data of all AVNRT cases from January 2011 to June 2021. In our study we classified atypical AVNRT and typical AVNRT based on the HA interval; HA≤70 ms in the His bundle region during tachycardia was considered as typical AVNRT. Other parameters were also analysed during tachycardia, such as: induction by atrial or ventricular pacing, AH/HA ratio, tachycardia cycle length and site of the earliest atrial activation. The demographic profile of the patients were also compared between 2 groups.

RESULTS

Atypical AVNRT was found in 75/1431 patients (5.2%) of all cases of AVNRT. The age of patients with atypical AVNRT was 52.4 ± 15.2 years (range 9-82 years) while that for typical AVNRT it was 48.2 ± 15.7 years (2-89 years), p = 0.023. There was no gender difference. Atypical AVNRT was induced by only ventricular extrastimuli (VES) in 17/75 (22.6%) while in typical AVNRT this was seen in only 12/1356 patients (0.9%, p < 0.001). Induction of atypical AVNRT was seen by both atrial extrastimuli (AES) and VES in 17/75 patients (22.6%) while in typical AVNRT this was seen in 64/1356 patients (4.8%, p < 0.001). Atypical AVNRT was induced by only AES in 40/75 patients (53.3%) while in typical AVNRT this was seen in 1280/1356 patients (94.3%, p < 0.001). An AH >200 ms during tachycardia was seen in all patients with typical AVNRT and in only 31/75 patients (41.3%) of atypical AVNRT (p < 0.00001). An interesting finding in atypical AVNRT was the earliest atrial activation at the His bundle region in 10/75 (13.3%) patients.

CONCLUSION

Atypical AVNRT prevalence depends on the way it is classified; this was 5.2% of all AVNRT cases in our study. Typical AVNRT was seen more frequently in comparatively younger age group and was more often induced by AES. Atypical AVNRT was much more commonly induced by only VES compared to typical AVNRT. It was not so unusual in atypical AVNRT to find the earliest atrial activation in the His bundle region.