Fast-slow atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia phenotype mimicking the slow-slow type

Abstract

Abstract Background Fast-slow (F/S-) atrioventricular (AV) nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) is characterized by a short atrio-His (AH) interval and the earliest site of atrial activation (EAA) in the proximal coronary sinus (EAA-CS), while slow-slow (S/S-) AVNRT presents a long AH interval and EAA-CS. Those intracardiac appearances are initial indicators for making a diagnosis. Purpose To identify an unknown phenotype of F/S-AVNRT. Methods Among 46 consecutive patients with F/S-AVNRT, 6 patients (1 man, age 59±9) had an apparent but not typical (pseudo-) S/S-AVNRT during an electrophysiologic study. In 2 patients, pseudo-S/S-AVNRT was clinically documented. Results In all 6 patients, the diagnosis of F/S-AVNRT was made by an exclusion of atrial tachycardia with findings of 1) a V-A-V response following ventricular entrainment or 2) termination without atrial capture by ventricular pacing, and an exclusion of AV reentrant tachycardia with a ventriculoatrial dissociation during an initial (so-called QRS transition) zone of ventricular entrainment. An initial A-A-V activation sequence on atrial induction of F/S-AVNRT observed in 1 patient and Wenckebach-type AV block during ongoing F/S-AVNRT developing in 3 patients suggested the presence of the lower common pathway (LCP). Like the typical S/S-AVNRT, pseudo-S/S-AVNRT was induced with atrial stimulation after a jump in the AH interval or double ventricular response. However, in all patients, the pseudo-S/S-AVNRT transited to F/S-AVNRT following AV block in a single cycle and/or pseudo-S/S-AVNRT transited from spontaneously or triggered by atrial contractions. Importantly, on these transitions, the atrial cycle length (CL) and EAA-CS remained unchanged, that is, the atrial CL of S/S-AVNRT was almost identical to that of F/S-AVNRT, suggesting that the essential circuit of both tachycardias was identical. Actually, both tachycardias were cured by ablation at a single site in the traditional slow pathway (SP). Collectively, the pseudo-S/S-AVNRT was diagnosed as another phenotype of F/S-AVNRT accompanied by sustained antegrade conduction via another bystander (likely the left-sided or superior) SP breaking through the His bundle owing to the repetitive antegrade block at the LCP occurring by linking phenomenon, thus representing a long AH interval during the ongoing F/S-AVNRT. When the antegrade conduction is blocked at the bystander SP during the pseudo-S/S-AVNRT, releasing the linking phenomenon, the subsequent antegrade conduction reach the His-bundle via the fast pathway, thus returning to F/S-AVNRT. Conclusions An unknown, but not rare F/S-AVNRT phenotype exists that apparently mimics the typical S/S-AVNRT and is also an unknown subtype of apparent S/S-AVNRT. The presence of this pseudo-S/S-AVNRT suggests the limitation of classifying types of AVNRT based on AH and HA intervals during tachycardia. Understandings of this phenotype can advance a diagnosis of atypical AVNRT with multiple phenotypes. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.