BACKGROUND: Distinguishing between junctional tachycardia (JT) and atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) is essential to minimize unnecessary catheter ablation and the risk of heart block during treatment of AVNRT. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the tachycardia response to atrial overdrive pacing at a cycle length (CL) slightly shorter than tachycardia CL can differentiate between JT and AVNRT. We hypothesized that atrial overdrive pacing would transiently suppress JT but would entrain AVNRT. METHODS: Twenty-one patients in whom AVNRT was induced and atrial overdrive pacing during either AVNRT or JT was attempted were included in the study. We predicted that, upon cessation of atrial overdrive pacing, an atrial-His-His-atrial (AHHA) response would identify JT and an atrial-His-atrial (AHA) response would identify AVNRT. RESULTS: A total of 8 JT and 21 typical AVNRT were induced. Atrial overdrive pacing was attempted in all cases of JT and in 16 cases of AVNRT. An AHHA response was observed in 100% (8/8) of JT cases. In 2 cases of AVNRT, atrial overdrive pacing repetitively terminated the tachycardia. In the remaining patients with AVNRT, an AHA response was observed in 100% (14/14) of cases. When a response was able to be elicited, atrial overdrive pacing was 100% sensitive and 100% specific for differentiating JT from AVNRT. CONCLUSION: Atrial overdrive pacing during tachycardia can rapidly differentiate JT from AVNRT, which can improve the safety and efficiency of catheter ablation of these arrhythmias.
BACKGROUND: Distinguishing between junctional tachycardia (JT) and atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) is essential to minimize unnecessary catheter ablation and the risk of heart block during treatment of AVNRT. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the tachycardia response to atrial overdrive pacing at a cycle length (CL) slightly shorter than tachycardia CL can differentiate between JT and AVNRT. We hypothesized that atrial overdrive pacing would transiently suppress JT but would entrain AVNRT. METHODS: Twenty-one patients in whom AVNRT was induced and atrial overdrive pacing during either AVNRT or JT was attempted were included in the study. We predicted that, upon cessation of atrial overdrive pacing, an atrial-His-His-atrial (AHHA) response would identify JT and an atrial-His-atrial (AHA) response would identify AVNRT. RESULTS: A total of 8 JT and 21 typical AVNRT were induced. Atrial overdrive pacing was attempted in all cases of JT and in 16 cases of AVNRT. An AHHA response was observed in 100% (8/8) of JT cases. In 2 cases of AVNRT, atrial overdrive pacing repetitively terminated the tachycardia. In the remaining patients with AVNRT, an AHA response was observed in 100% (14/14) of cases. When a response was able to be elicited, atrial overdrive pacing was 100% sensitive and 100% specific for differentiating JT from AVNRT. CONCLUSION:Atrial overdrive pacing during tachycardia can rapidly differentiate JT from AVNRT, which can improve the safety and efficiency of catheter ablation of these arrhythmias.