Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 8810783

[Electrophysiological study].

Abstract

The purpose of an electrophysiological study (EPS) is to determine the mechanism of arrhythmias and to decide the means of therapy for that arrhythmia. The electrode catheters are introduced percutaneously into the atria or ventricle to record the intracardiac electrogram or to stimulate those areas by electrical current. In bradycardia, atrioventricular block and sick sinus syndrome are the good indications of EPS. To determine the indication of pacemaker implantation, recording the block site of atrioventricular block is useful, and sinus node recovery time and sinoatrial conduction time in sick sinus syndrome are important by performing an electrical stimulation to the atrial muscle. In tachyarrhythmia, if the mechanism of arrhythmia is reentry, it can be induced or terminated by electrical stimulation repeatedly. So that the drug efficacy can be defined by testing the re-inducibility after the drug therapy. If the mechanism of arrhythmia is not clear, the EPS is also performed to make the mechanism of the arrhythmia clear. In triggered activity, especially early after depolarization, the recording of monophasic action potential is useful for diagnosis. EPS can provide the ablation site clear, moreover, the indication of implantable cardioverter defibrillator has been decided by EPS. Therefore, the role of EPS has also been important in selection of non-pharmacological treatment.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Y Enjoji, K Sugi, T Yamaguchi. 1996. [Electrophysiological study].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8810783/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Proarrhythmic effect of pacemaker stimulation in patients with implanted cardioverter-defibrillators.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the potential of right ventricular VVI backup pacing to induce ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with implanted cardioverter-defibrillators. METHODS AND RESULTS: All consecutive patients presenting exclusively with pacemaker-induced tachycardias (PITs) were included in a prospective study using a crossover protocol. Patients were randomized to either group 1 (augmentation of the baseline frequency of the pacemaker to 60 bpm) or group 2 (pacemaker turned off) and were followed up for 1 year and then crossed over to the other programming, looking for reoccurrence of PIT. Of 150 consecutive patients, 39 (26%) had PIT, 13 of them exclusively (8.6%). Forty of 1063 analyzed tachyarrhythmias of all the patients were PIT (3%). Before inclusion in the study, the patients had 2.7+/-0.9 PITs in 11+/-6.5 months with their pacemakers programmed empirically at 42.3 bpm. During the study phase, no PIT occurred while the pacemaker was turned off, whereas programming to 60 bpm led to the recurrence of PIT in 5 of 6 patients (1.4+/-0.6 per patient). At the end of the study, 9 patients underwent a prolonged follow-up with their pacemakers turned off, resulting in spontaneous episodes of ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation in 5 patients, but PITs were no longer observed. CONCLUSIONS: This crossover protocol proves the potential proarrhythmic effect of pacemaker stimulation in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients. Resulting PITs led to clinical symptoms and antitachycardia therapy by the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Thus, in patients presenting with PIT but without a pacemaker indication, the pacemaker feature should be turned off, or, alternatively, the longest possible escape interval should be programmed.

Arrhythmias, Cardiac↗