Open AccessMeasurement of the ventriculoatrial interval from the coronary sinus during para‐Hisian pacing may fail to distinguish ventriculoatrial nodal conduction from conduction over a septal accessory pathway
Author(s) -
Iijima Takafumi,
Kaneko Yoshiaki,
Nakajima Tadashi,
Irie Tadanobu,
Ota Masaki,
Saito Akihiro,
Kurabayashi Masahiko
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
journal of arrhythmia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.463
H-Index - 21
eISSN - 1883-2148
pISSN - 1880-4276
DOI - 10.1016/j.joa.2014.05.005
Subject(s) - medicine , coronary sinus , atrioventricular node , cardiology , nodal , catheter ablation , electrophysiology , ablation , accessory pathway , pr interval , anesthesia , tachycardia , heart rate , blood pressure
Background Para‐Hisian pacing (PHP) helps differentiate retrograde conduction over an accessory pathway (AP) from retrograde conduction over the atrioventricular (AV) node. This study examined a potential limitation of this technique, focusing on the measurement of the ventriculoatrial (V–A) interval from the coronary sinus (CS) during PHP. Methods Our subjects were 9 patients undergoing electrophysiological studies before successful catheter ablation of a posteroseptal AP. During PHP, retrograde conduction occurred over an AP when the pacing stimulus to atrium (S–A) interval recorded near the AP remained unchanged whether the His bundle (HB) was captured or not (pattern 1), or when a loss of HB capture was associated with an increase in the S–A interval and no change in the V–A interval near the AP (pattern 2). Results Patterns 1 and 2 were observed in 5 (56%) and 2 (22%) patients, respectively. However, in the remaining 2 patients (22%), loss of HB capture during PHP was associated with an increase in the S–A interval (as in pattern 2), whereas the V–A interval near the AP could not be measured because no ventricular electrogram was visible on the CS recording (pattern 3); therefore, the presence of AP could not be confirmed by PHP. In patterns 2 and 3, the atrial activation sequence remained unchanged whether the HB was captured or not. Conclusions PHP may not be able to discriminate between a retrograde septal AP and AV nodal conduction in patients whose proximal CS recording shows no visible ventricular electrogram.