Electrophysiological characteristics and outcome in patients with idiopathic right ventricular arrhythmia compared with arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia. Issue 1 (1st January 2002)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Niroomand, F; Carbucicchio, C; Tondo, C; Riva, S; Fassini, G; Apostolo, A; Trevisi, N; Della Bella, P
• Is Part Of: Heart. Volume 87:Issue 1(2002)
• Page Start: 41
• Page End: 47
• Publication Date: 2002-01-01
• Subjects: arrhythmia -- right ventricular dysplasia -- catheter ablation; ARVD, arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia -- IRVA, idiopathic right ventricular arrhythmia -- LBBB, left bundle branch block -- MRI, magnetic resonance imaging -- RBBB, right bundle branch block -- RFCA, radiofrequency catheter ablation -- VT ventricular tachycardia; Heart -- Diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Cardiology -- Periodicals; 616.12
• DOI: 10.1136/heart.87.1.41
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1355-6037

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Idiopathic right ventricular arrhythmias (IRVA) are responsive to medical and ablative treatment and have a benign prognosis. Arrhythmias caused by right ventricular dysplasia (ARVD) are refractory to treatment and may cause sudden death. It is difficult to distinguish between these two types of arrhythmia. Objective: To differentiate patients with IRVA and ARVD by a conventional electrophysiological study. Methods: 56 patients with a right ventricular arrhythmia were studied. They had no history or signs of any cardiac disease other than right ventricular dysplasia. They were classified as having IRVA (n = 41) or ARVD (n = 15) on the basis of family history, ECG characteristics, and various imaging techniques. They were further investigated by standard diagnostic electrophysiology. Results: The two groups were clearly distinguished by the electrophysiological study in the following ways: inducibility of ventricular tachycardia by programmed electrical stimulation with ventricular extrastimuli (IRVA 3% v ARVD 93%, p < 0.0001); presence of more than one ECG morphology during tachycardia (IRVA 0% v ARVD 73%, p < 0.0001); and fragmented diastolic potentials during ventricular arrhythmia (IRVA 0% v ARVD 93%, p < 0.0001). Data from the clinical follow up in these patients supported the diagnosis derived from the electrophysiological study. Conclusions: Patients with IRVA or ARVD can be distinguished by specific electrophysiological criteria. A diagnosis of ARVD can be made reliably on the basis of clinical presentation, imaging techniques, and an electrophysiological study.