| Literature DB >> 26705217 |
Karol Deutsch1, Sebastian Stec, Piotr Kukla, Aleksandra Morka, Marek Jastrzebski, Artur Baszko, Maciej Pitak, Janusz Sledz, Kamil Fijorek, Mariusz Mazij, Bartosz Ludwik, Marcin Gubaro, Leslaw Szydlowski.
Abstract
To establish an appropriate treatment strategy and determine if ablation is indicated for patients with narrow QRS complex supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), analysis of a standard 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) is required, which can differentiate between the 2 most common mechanisms underlying SVT: atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT) and orthodromic atrioventricular reentry tachycardia (OAVRT). Recently, new, highly accurate electrocardiographic criteria for the differential diagnosis of SVT in adults were proposed; however, those criteria have not yet been validated in a pediatric population.All ECGs were recorded during invasive electrophysiology study of pediatric patients (n = 212; age: 13.2 ± 3.5, range: 1-18; girls: 48%). We assessed the diagnostic value of the 2 new and 7 standard criteria for differentiating AVNRT from OAVRT in a pediatric population.Two of the standard criteria were found significantly more often in ECGs from the OAVRT group than from the AVNRT group (retrograde P waves [63% vs 11%, P < 0.001] and ST-segment depression in the II, III, aVF, V1-V6 leads [42% vs 27%; P < 0.05]), whereas 1 standard criterion was found significantly more often in ECGs from the AVNRT group than from the OAVRT group (pseudo r' wave in V1 lead [39% vs 10%, P < 0.001]). The remaining 6 criteria did not reach statistical significance for differentiating SVT, and the accuracy of prediction did not exceed 70%. Based on these results, a multivariable decision rule to evaluate differential diagnosis of SVT was performed.These results indicate that both the standard and new electrocardiographic criteria for discriminating between AVNRT and OAVRT have lower diagnostic values in children and adolescents than in adults. A decision model based on 5 simple clinical and ECG parameters may predict a final diagnosis with better accuracy.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26705217 PMCID: PMC4697983 DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002310
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) ISSN: 0025-7974 Impact factor: 1.817
FIGURE 1A patient with OAVRT with retrograde P waves in lead III and aVF (∗), ST-segment elevation in aVR (#), ST-segment depression in lead II and V4–V5 (^), and T wave inversion in lead III and V1 (&). OAVRT = orthodromic atrioventricular reentry tachycardia, SR = sinus rhythm.
FIGURE 2A patient with AVNRT with pseudo r′ wave in V1 (∗), r′ wave in aVR (^), aVL notch (&), and the presence of an s wave in sinus rhythm and SVT (#). AVNRT = atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia, SR = sinus rhythm.
Accuracy, Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive Predictive Value, Negative Predictive Value, Likelihood Ratio of a Positive Test, and Likelihood Ratio of a Negative Test of the Electrocardiographic Criteria in AVNRT Versus OAVRT
Electrocardiographic Characteristics of the Study Populations
Multivariable Decision Rule (JUNIOR SVT SCORE) to Differentiate Between OAVRT and AVNRT
Correct Clinical Diagnosis of SVT, and AT Performed by Each Evaluator