Inadvertent Catheter-Induced Right Bundle Branch Block in a Patient with Preexistent Left Bundle Branch Block and Recurrent Macroreentrant Ventricular Tachycardia

This article describes the inadvertent, catheter-induced induction of right bundle branch block resulting not only in transient complete infra-His heart block but also in temporary interruption of the macroreentry circuit of ventricular tachycardia. A patient with preexistent left bundle branch block and spontaneous ventricular tachycardia based upon the bundle branch reentry mechanism underwent electrophysiological testing for the evaluation of sotalol drug efficacy. In search of an optimal His-bundle recording, the manipulation of a 6 Fr quadripolar catheter caused a right bundle branch block, thus advancing the preexistent left bundle branch block to complete heart block. Retrograde ventriculoatrial conduction remained unaffected. The macroreentrant tachycardia with left bundle branch block configuration was no longer inducible. While the patient continued on unchanged sotalol medication (320 mg/d) he required temporary pacing for 16 hours until the block subsided. A subsequent induction attempt demonstrated initiation of the tachycardia. Finally, guided by invasive testing, the patient successfully received amiodarone therapy (300 mg/d). The patient completed an uneventful follow up of 27 months. No progression of conduction delay was observed. This case suggests that the inadvertent induction of right bundle branch block prevents the initiation of ventricular tachycardias relying on bundle branch reentry. Therefore, missed diagnosis or misinterpretation of antiarrhythmic drug efficacy might occur if there is no electrophysiological reevaluation after right bundle branch recovery.     

Spontaneous Termination of Paroxysmal Supraventricular Tachycardia Following Disappearance of Bundle Branch Block Ipsilateral to a Concealed Atrioventricular Accessory Pathway: The Role of Autonomic Tone in Tachycardia Diagnosis

We present a case of an 18-year-old man with a history of palpitations in whom episodes of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia were easily initiated by administered atrial premature beats. In all 15 control episodes of tachycardia, functional left bundle branch block (LBBB) seen at the onset, resolved within 10–20 cycles (mean, 13.1 ± 0.95). The tachycardia ended with the normalized QRS complex in each episode. Eleven episodes ended because of block within the antegrade pathway (ended with a P-wave), and four episodes stopped because of block within the retrograde pathway (ended without a P-wave). During the administration of isoproterenol (1 mg/min IV) all six episodes of tachycardia had LBBB but these did not end when LBBB disappeared spontaneously. When LBBB subsided, the mean tachycardia cycle interval shortened from 328.5 ± 1.4 to 264.2 ± 2.1 ms (p < 0.001). Each episode of tachycardia was then terminated by carotid sinus massage. The disappearance of LBBB in control conditions presented the retrograde and antegrade limbs of the reentrant circuit with an early impulse that stopped the tachycardia. After isoproterenol adminstration, the tachycardia did not end following disappearance of LBBB, thus enabling the tachycardia cycle interval to shorten by a mean of 64.3 ± 1.9 ms. This extent of tachycardia acceleration is diagnostic of the participation of a concealed, left free-wall bypass tract.     

Identification of Ventricular Tachycardia Using Intracavitary Ventricular Electrograms: Analysis of Time and Frequency Domain Patterns

Tachycardia detection by implantable antitachycardia devices using rate alone has major limitations. Several alternative methods have been proposed to distinguish ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation from normal sinus rhythm using intracardiac electrograms. These methods have not been tested, however, for recognition of ventricular tachycardia in patients with abnormal surface QRS conduction during sinus rhythm or with antiarrhythmic drug therapy. In this study, three techniques for the indentification of ventricular tachycardia from intracavitary bipolar ventricular electrograms were examined and compared: correlation waveform analysis, amplitude distribution analysis, and spectral analysis using Fast Fourier transformation. Thirty episodes of induced monomorphic ventricular tachycardia were analyzed and compared sinus rhythm in four groups of patients with: I. Normal surface QRS conduction during sinus rhythm without antiarrhythmic drug therapy (five episodes); II. Intraventricular conduction delay or bundle branch block during sinus rhythm without antiarrhythmic drug therapy (nine episodes); III. Normal surface QRS conduction during sinus rhythm with antiarrhythmic therapy (six episodes); and IV. Intraventricular conduction delay or bundle branch block during sinus rhythm with antiarrhythmic drug therapy (ten episodes). Correlation waveform analysis had 100% sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing ventricular tachycardia from sinus rhythm, even in the presence of an intraventricular conduction delay, bundle branch block, and antiarrhythmic drug therapy. In contrast, amplitude distribution analysis differentiated 15/30 episodes (50.0%) of ventricular tachycardia from sinus rhythm, and a maximum of 18/30 episodes (60.0%) of ventricular tachycardia were identified by specal analysis using Fast Fourier transformation. Correlation waveform analysis appears to be a reliable technique to discriminate ventricular tachycardia from sinus rhythm using intracavitary ventricular electrograms. Its computational demands are modest, making it suitable for consideration in an implantable antitachycardia device.     

Identification of Ventricular Tachycardia Using Intracardiac Electrograms: A Comparison of Unipolar Versus Bipolar Waveform Analysis

Implantable antitachycardia devices suffer a high false-positive rate of delivery of therapy because current detection schemes based upon ventricular rate and rate variations are excessively sensitive at the cost of specificity. Several methods have been proposed for providing complementary information derived from morphologic analysis of intraventricular electrograms in order to increase specificity. The majority of these techniques have utilized bipolar electrogram analysis to detect changes in ventricular activation indicative of ventricular tachycardia. Whether bipolar or unipolar intracardiac electrogram analysis might be preferred for discriminating ventricular tachycardia from sinus rhythm has not been determined. In this study, a previously demonstrated method for identification of ventricular tachycardia using intracardiac electrograms, correlation waveform analysis, was used to analyze both unipolar and bipolar signals during sinus rhythm and ventricular tachycardia recorded during electrophysiology studies of 15 patients with inducible sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia. Correlation waveform analysis consistently discriminated between all depolarizations during ventricular tachycardia in 14/15 patients (93%) using either electrogram configuration; 13 of the 14 patients were common to both groups. Of these patients, 8/15 (53%) had greater separation between sinus rhythm and ventricular waveforms with bipolar electrogram analysis while 7/15 (47%) had greater separation with unipolar electrogram analysis. We conclude that morphologic analysis of unipolar and bipolar electrograms may be equally effective in distinguishing ventricular tachycardia from sinus rhythm. For individual patients, either a unipolar or bipolar ventricular configuration may be preferable, and should be chosen on a patient-specific basis during electrophysiology study prior to antitachycardia device implantation.     

Intraventricular Electrogram Analysis for Ventricular Tachycardia Detection: Statistical Validation

THRONE, R.D., ET AL.: Intraventricular Electrogram Analysis for Ventricular Tachycardia Detection: Statistical Validation. Time-domain analysis of intraventricular electrogram morphology during ventricular tachycardia (VT) and sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation (SR/AF) has been proposed as a method for increasing the specificity of pathological tachycardia detection by antitachycardia devices. However, few studies have validated the use of such analysis with statistical methods. When statistical methods have been utilized, it has been assumed that the distribution of the values derived from analysis of the intracardiac electrograms have had a normal (gaussian) distribution. In this study, we sought to determine whether: (1) the distribution of values derived from analysis of intracardiac electrogram during SR/AF and VT is gaussian or nongaussian; and (2) the discrimination of monomorphic VT from SR/AF using SR/AF templates can be validated statistically. Two previously proposed time-domain methods—correlation waveform analysis (CWA) and area of difference (AD)—were selected for evaluation of 29 patients with 33 distinct, sustained monomorphic VTs. An initial SR/AF template was used to analyze subsequent SR/AF and VT passages with a minimum of 50 consecutive depolarizations using a “best-fit” alignment. The values derived from each analysis were examined subsequently for skewness (asymmetry) and kurtosis (shape) using two-tailed tests (p < 0.02). For passages of SR/AF, a normal (gaussian) distribution was present in only 24% (CWA), and 45% (AD); for passages of VT, normal distribution was present in only 58% for both CWA and AD. Using appropriate statistical testing with nonparametric tolerance intervals, CWA and AD discriminated VT from SR/AF in 29 out of 33 (88%), and 30 out of 33 (91%) instances, respectively, with 95% confidence. Thus, the assumption of a gaussian distribution for values derived from time-domain analysis of intraventricular electrograms for VT detection is not uniformly valid. Both CWA, which is independent of both baseline and amplitude fluctuations, and AD, which is not independent of these fluctuations, have similar performance when validated with appropriate statistical methods.     

Verapamil in Idiopathic Ventricular Tachycardia of Right Bundle Branch Block Morphology: Observations During Electrophysiologic and Exercise Testing

Electrophysiologic studies before and after administration of verapamil were performed in three young patients with recurrent sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) of right bundle branch block morphology. VT was not provoked by maximal treadmill testing in any patient. Electrophysiologic findings at induction of VT suggested reentry in the first patient and triggered automaticity in the second. Findings were inconclusive in the third patient. Intravenous verapamil terminated the VT in all the three cases. Oral verapamil prevented laboratory induction of sustained VT in the latter two patients. However, VT could be provoked during exercise in both while on oral verapamil therapy. These findings suggest that different mechanisms may underlie ventricular tachycardia dependent upon slow-response tissue; the role of oral verapamil in the treatment of such VT needs further investigation.     

A Historical Perspective on the Role of Functional Lines of Block in the Re‐entrant Circuit of Ventricular Tachycardia

The ablation strategy for ventricular tachycardia (VT) rapidly evolved from an entrainment mapping approach for identification of the critical isthmus of the re‐entrant circuit during monomorphic VT, toward a substrate‐based approach aiming to ablate surrogate markers of the circuit during sinus rhythm in hemodynamically nontolerated and polymorphic VT. The latter approach implies an assumption that the circuits responsible for the arrhythmia are anatomical or fixed, and present during sinus rhythm. Accordingly, the lines of block delimiting the channels of the circuits are often considered fixed, although there is evidence that they are functional or more frequently a combination of fixed and functional. The electroanatomical substrate‐based approach to VT ablation performed during sinus rhythm is increasingly adopted in clinical practice and often described as scar homogenization, scar dechanneling, or core isolation. However, whether the surrogate markers of the VT circuit during sinus rhythm match the circuit during arrhythmias remains to be fully demonstrated. The myocardial scar is a heterogeneous electrophysiological milieu with complex arrhythmogenic mechanisms that potentially coexist simultaneously. Moreover, the scar consists of different areas of diverse refractoriness and conduction. It can be misleading to limit the arrhythmogenic perspective of the myocardial scar to fixed or anatomical barriers held responsible for the re‐entry circuit. Greater understanding of the role of functional lines of block in VT and the validity of the surrogate targets being ablated is necessary to further improve the technique and outcome of VT ablation.     

Importance of Systematic Right Ventricular Assessment in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Candidates: A Machine Learning Approach

1. Download : Download high-res image (287KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image