Electrophysiological features and radiofrequency catheter ablation of supraventricular tachycardia in patients with persistent left superior vena cava

BACKGROUND: The electrophysiological features and roles of persistent left superior vena cava (PLSVC) in supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) are not known. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to elucidate the electrophysiological features and roles of PLSVC in patients with SVT. METHODS: We included 37 patients with PLSVC (mean age 43.5 ± 17.1 years; 35.1% men) and 510 patients without PLSVC (mean age 43.9 ± 18.8 years; 48.2% men) who underwent an electrophysiology study for SVT. The number of induced tachycardias, location of the slow pathway (SP) or accessory pathway (AP), and radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) outcomes were compared between patients with and without PLSVC. During RFCA of the left AP, a coronary sinus (CS) catheter was placed into the left superior vena cava (left superior vena cava group) or the great cardiac vein (great cardiac vein group). The RFCA outcomes were compared between the groups. RESULTS: In patients with PLSVC, 40 tachycardias were induced: atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) (n = 19), atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (n = 17), and focal atrial tachycardia (n = 4). Among patients with AVNRT, an SP in the CS was significantly more frequent in patients with PLSVC than in those without PLSVC (47.4% vs 3.8%; P < .001). In patients with the left AP, the number of RFCA attempts and recurrence were lower in the great cardiac vein group than in the left superior vena cava group. CONCLUSION: An SP in the CS is prevalent in patients with AVNRT and PLSVC. It is useful to place a CS catheter into the great cardiac vein in patients with a left AP and PLSVC. ; restriction