| Literature DB >> 29674334 |
Michael E Field1, Paolo Donateo2, Nicola Bottoni3, Matteo Iori3, Michele Brignole1,2, Ryan T Kipp1, Douglas E Kopp1, Miguel A Leal1, Lee L Eckhardt1, Jennifer M Wright1, Kathleen E Walsh1, Richard L Page1, Mohamed H Hamdan4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The mechanism of inappropriate sinus tachycardia (IST) remains incompletely understood. METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: atrial tachycardia; atrio‐ventricular conduction; inappropriate sinus tachycardia
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29674334 PMCID: PMC6015284 DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.118.008528
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Am Heart Assoc ISSN: 2047-9980 Impact factor: 5.501
Baseline Patient Characteristics
| Demographics | IST Group | Isuprel Group | AT Group |
|---|---|---|---|
| n=11 | n=9 | n=15 | |
| Age, y | 33±14 | 44±16 | 51±18 |
| Female, n (%) | 9 (82) | 7 (78) | 10 (67) |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 1 (9) | 1 (11) | 3 (20) |
| Diabetes mellitus, n (%) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (7) |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 26±6 | 28±5 | 25±4 |
| LVEF, % | 66±5 | 62±4 | 60±6 |
| LA size, mm | 32±4 | 33±4 | 36±3 |
| LVEDD, mm | 41±6 | 44±5 | 47±7 |
| Sinus rate, bpm | 97±12 | 71±11 | 75±15 |
| PR interval, ms | 146±15 | 158±22 | 157±27 |
| QRS interval, ms | 84±11 | 94±13 | 90±16 |
| QT interval, ms | 355±27 | 404±27 | 390±38 |
| QTc interval, ms | 465±60 | 448±29 | 432±46 |
| EPS baseline CL, ms | 578±71 | 816±128 | 800±193 |
| AH interval, ms | 59±20 | 79±24 | 86±25 |
| AV WCL, ms | 298±42 | 351±64 | 344±52 |
| AVNERP, ms | 250±41 | 310±49 | 275±46 |
Values are mean±SD for continuous data and n (%) for categorical data. AH, atrial‐His interval; ANVERP, AV nodal effective refractory period at a drive cycle length of 600 ms; AV, atrioventricular; AT, atrial tachycardia; BMI, body mass index; bpm, beats per minute; CL, cycle length; EPS, electrophysiology study; IST, inappropriate sinus tachycardia; LA, left atrial; LVEDD, left ventricular end‐diastolic diameter; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction.
P<0.05 vs IST group.
Figure 1PR intervals during lower and higher heart rate (HR) in patients with inappropriate sinus tachycardia (IST Group, left), healthy controls at baseline and following isoproterenol infusion (Isuprel Group, middle), and sinus rhythm and atrial tachycardia (AT Group, right). The PR interval significantly shortened with the increases in HR in the IST Group, with a similar decrease noted in the Isuprel Group. In contrast, patients in the AT Group experienced PR lengthening during AT when compared with baseline normal sinus rhythm (*P<0.05, lower HR vs higher HR within each group). The larger dots indicate sample means. Bars represent 1 SD.
Figure 2Sample tracings showing changes in P‐wave amplitude and PR interval in (1) a patient with inappropriate sinus tachycardia (top tracings), (2) a healthy control patient before and after isoproterenol infusion (middle tracings), and (3) a patient during sinus rhythm and high cristae atrial tachycardia (lower tracings). Note the increase in P‐wave amplitude in lead II and PR shortening at faster rates when compared with slower rates in the patient with inappropriate sinus tachycardia (IST) and healthy control following isoproterenol infusion. In the patient with atrial tachycardia (AT), the PR interval increased at faster rates when compared with slower rates.