Differences in Electrophysiological Substrate in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and Cardiac Arrest or Ventricular Tachycardia: Insights From Endocardial Mapping and Signal‐Averaged Electrocardiography

BackgroundMany studies have combined patients with hemodynamically well-tolerated ventricular tachycardia (VT) and those with cardiac arrest (CA) as a single, homogenous group. Recent studies suggest that these two groups have different electrophysiological substrates and responses to therapy. Most of these studies, however, enrolled patientswith a variety of cardiac diagnoses. Methods and ResultsWe used signal-averaged electrocardiography (SAECG) and endocardial catheter mapping to define the electrophysiological substrate in patients with coronary artery disease and VT or CA and correlate the results of the two methods. We also examined the usefulness of SAECG in CA patients to differentiate those with inducible arrhythmias from those who are noninducible. VT patients were more likely to have had a prior myocardial infarction (p =0.0005) and to have inducible arrhythmias (p =0.0001) than were CA patients. The induced arrhythmias in patients who presented with VT was VT in more than 90% of cases, whereas in CA patients, polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (PMVT) accounted for one third of induced arrhythmias. Mean filtered QRS duration was longer (135 versus 120 msec) and the terminal QRS voltage was smaller (20 versus 34, V) in VT than in CA patients (p < 0.01). Sixty-three percent of CA patients and 87% of VT patients had abnormal SAECG (p =0.001). VT patients had more extensive endocardial abnormalities and more abnormal (53% versus 40%, p = 0.002), fractionated (8% versus 3%o, p=0.02), late (17% versus 8%, p=0.0003), and late abnormal or fractionated (14% versus 4%, p=0.0001) sites than CA patients. VT patients had a greater duration of the longest electrogram (129 versus 109 msec, p = 0.0006) and total endocardial activation time (68 versus 54 msec, p = 0.009). Among CA patients, those with induced VT had more extensive substrate than did those with induced PMVT and were similar to VT patients with induced VT. Among CA patients, the trend for more patients with inducible VT (77%) or PMVT (55%) than noninducible patients (47%) to have an abnormal SAECG did not reach statistical significance (p =0.14). The positive and negative predictive values of an abnormal SAECG were 77%O and 44%, respectively. ConclusionsVT patients have more extensive endocardial substrate than CA patients, which translates into greater and more frequent SAECG abnormalities. Among CA patients, there are significant differences in substrate between patients with induced VT and those with induced PMVT. SAECG is not useful in differentiating CA patients who have inducible VT or PMVT from those who do not.

[1]  W. Mckenna,et al.  Significance of signal-averaged electrocardiography in relation to endomyocardial biopsy and ventricular stimulation studies in patients with ventricular tachycardia without clinically apparent heart disease. , 1989, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  M. Josephson,et al.  Sinus Mapping in Patients with Cardiac Arrest and Coronary Disease—Results and Correlation with Outcome , 1989, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[3]  M. Josephson,et al.  Sustained ventricular tachycardia in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy: electrophysiologic testing and lack of response to antiarrhythmic drug therapy. , 1984, Circulation.

[4]  A H Harken,et al.  Relation between late potentials on the body surface and directly recorded fragmented electrograms in patients with ventricular tachycardia. , 1983, The American journal of cardiology.

[5]  M. Cooper,et al.  Differences between patients with ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation as assessed by signal-averaged electrocardiogram, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiac mapping. , 1988, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[6]  L. Horowitz,et al.  The Limitations of Epicardial Mapping as a Guide to the Surgical Therapy of Ventricular Tachycardia , 1978, Circulation.

[7]  Pradeep Tagare,et al.  Signal averaging , 1993 .

[8]  J. Ruskin,et al.  Determinants of the outcome of electrophysiologic study in patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias. , 1985, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[9]  A. Keren,et al.  Signal-averaged electrocardiographic late potentials in patients with ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia: correlation with clinical arrhythmia and electrophysiologic study. , 1985, The American journal of cardiology.

[10]  E. Gang,et al.  The signal-averaged electrocardiogram as a screening test for inducibility of sustained ventricular tachycardia in high risk patients: a prospective study. , 1987, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  H. Greene,et al.  Sustained ventricular arrhythmias: differences between survivors of cardiac arrest and patients with recurrent sustained ventricular tachycardia. , 1988, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[12]  W. Stevenson,et al.  Clinical, angiographic, and electrophysiologic findings in patients with aborted sudden death as compared with patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia after myocardial infarction. , 1985, Circulation.

[13]  M. Josephson,et al.  Usefulness of programmed stimulation in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. , 1986, The American journal of cardiology.

[14]  J A Vassallo,et al.  Endocardial catheter mapping in patients in sinus rhythm: relationship to underlying heart disease and ventricular arrhythmias. , 1986, Circulation.

[15]  A H Harken,et al.  Recurrent sustained ventricular tachycardia: structure and ultrastructure of subendocardial regions in which tachycardia originates. , 1983, Circulation.

[16]  P. Denes,et al.  Correlation between the signal-averaged electrocardiogram and electrophysiologic study findings in patients with coronary artery disease and sustained ventricular tachycardia. , 1988, American heart journal.

[17]  M. Josephson,et al.  Comparison of individual and combined effects of procainamide and amiodarone in patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias. , 1988, Circulation.

[18]  M. Josephson,et al.  Identification of patients with ventricular tachycardia after myocardial infarction: signal-averaged electrocardiogram, Holter monitoring, and cardiac catheterization. , 1984, Circulation.

[19]  H. Greene,et al.  Signal-averaged electrocardiographic late potentials in resuscitated survivors of out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation. , 1990, The American journal of cardiology.

[20]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Epicardial and Endocardial Activation During Sustained Ventricular Tachycardia in Man , 1980, Circulation.

[21]  M. Josephson,et al.  Endocardial mapping in humans in sinus rhythm with normal left ventricles: activation patterns and characteristics of electrograms. , 1984, Circulation.

[22]  J. Gallagher,et al.  Termination of ventricular tachycardia with epicardial laser photocoagulation: a clinical comparison with patients undergoing successful endocardial photocoagulation alone. , 1990, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.