Advertisement






Click here for more guidelines.
CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home
     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 2002; 40:731-736
© 2002 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bode, F.
Right arrow Articles by Franz, M. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bode, F.
Right arrow Articles by Franz, M. R.

Upstream stimulation versus downstream stimulation

arrhythmogenesis based on repolarization dispersion in the human heart

Frank Bode, MD*{dagger}, Pamela Karasik, MD, FACC*, Hugo A. Katus, MD, FESC{dagger} and Michael R. Franz, MD, PhD, FACC*,*

* Veteran Affairs and Georgetown University Medical Centers, Washington, DC, USA
{dagger} Medizinische Klinik II, Universitaetsklinikum Luebeck, Germany



View larger version (26K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 1 Simultaneous monophasic action potential recording from the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) and right ventricular apex (RVA). The pacing sequence that initiates ventricular tachycardia (VT) at the successful stimulation site (RVA in this example) is compared to a corresponding pacing sequence at the noninducing stimulation site (RVOT). Intervals are given in milliseconds. (A) Pacing sequence prompting VT induction. Programmed electrical stimulation is performed in the RVA using three extra-stimuli (coupling intervals between stimuli (S): S1-S1 400 ms, S1-S2 290 ms, S2-S3 250 ms, S3-S4 240 ms). Action potential durations (APDs) were measured from the upstroke in phase 0 to the 90% repolarization level (Repol). During baseline stimulation (S1), APD is shorter at the RVA stimulation site than the RVOT site (284 vs. 302 ms). Upon introduction of premature stimuli, APDs shorten and conduction time (CT) from the RVA to the RVOT site increases. Dispersion of repolarization (Disp) measured between the time of 90% repolarization in the RVA and the time of 90% repolarization in the RVOT increases from 86ms at baseline (S1) to 92 ms with the last extra-stimulus applied (S4). (B) Closest coupled stimulation in the RVOT using three extra-stimuli (coupling intervals between stimuli: S1-S1 400 ms, S1-S2 290 ms, S2-S3 250 ms, S3-S4 215 ms). No VT is induced. In accordance with A, PD is longer at the RVOT stimulation site than the RVA site (300 ms vs. 282 ms). Conduction time between sites increases and APDs shorten upon introduction of premature stimuli, comparable to RVA pacing. Dispersion of repolarization is 50 ms during RVOT pacing at baseline (S1) and enhances to 82 ms with the last extra-stimulus applied (S4). Thus, stimulation of the RVOT site with longer APD produces less dispersion of repolarization than stimulation at the RVA site with shorter APD.

 


View larger version (21K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 2 Site specific difference in action potential duration (APD) and effective refractory period (ERP) during stimulation at basic cycle lengths (BCLs) of 600 ms and 400 ms. Action potential duration and ERP were significantly shorter at the inducing site (black bar) as compared to the noninducing site (white bar). *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

 


View larger version (19K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 3 Corresponding action potential durations (APDs) at the inducing (black bar) and noninducing site (white bar) during programmed stimulation. The APD decreased at both sites when premature extra-stimuli (S2-S4) were introduced at short coupling intervals. The APD was consistently shorter at the inducing site. *p < 0.05.

 


View larger version (19K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 4 Conduction time between the two ventricular sites. Impulses required progressively more time to propagate from the stimulation site to the remote site upon introduction of an increasing number of closely coupled extra-stimuli. No difference in intersite conduction time was found between stimulation at the ventricular tachycardia inducing site (black bar) vs. stimulation at the noninducing site (white bar). *p < 0.05.

 


View larger version (18K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 5 Dispersion of repolarization between the two ventricular sites. During baseline (S1) stimulation at the ventricular tachycardia-inducing site repolarization dispersion was larger than during stimulation at the noninducing site. Extra-stimulus application increased the dispersion of repolarization at both sites. Maximal dispersion produced by extra-stimulation at the noninducing site (white bar) only approached the amount of repolarization dispersion that was present during baseline stimulation at the inducing site (black bar). The largest repolarization dispersion was measured during extra-stimulation at the inducing site upon ventricular tachycardia initiation. *p < 0.05.

 




 
  CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home

Advertisement