Publish in this journal
Journal Information
Vol. 71. Issue 2.
Pages 116 (February 2018)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 71. Issue 2.
Pages 116 (February 2018)
ECG Contest
DOI: 10.1016/j.rec.2017.05.019
Full text access
Response to ECG, January 2018
Respuesta al ECG de enero de 2018
Visits
...
Pasquale Creaa,
Corresponding author
pasqualecrea@hotmail.it

Corresponding author:
, Emmanuele Soracia, Raffaella Mallamaceb
a Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Cardiology Unit, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
b Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Unit, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
Related content
Rev Esp Cardiol. 2018;71:4610.1016/j.rec.2017.05.018
Pasquale Crea, Emmanuele Soraci, Raffaella Mallamace
This item has received
...
Visits
(Daily data update)
Article information
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Figures (1)
Full Text

The correct answer is number 4. Within the refractory period of the right bundle branch, there was a short phase of supernormal conduction. Beat 2 (Figure) occurred during this brief period. The impulse was conducted simultaneously from both bundle branches, giving rise to a narrow QRS complex. In contrast, impulse 3 occurred slightly after the end of the supernormal phase; it was blocked in the anterograde direction along the right bundle branch and depolarized the same branch in a retrograde way (linking phenomenon).1,2 This shifted forward the right bundle branch cycle, including the window of supernormal conduction; the next impulse occurred within the supernormal conduction window and a narrow QRS complex occurred again, and so on.

Figure
(0.32MB).

Answer 1 is incorrect because no pure ventricular extrasystole with left bundle branch block morphology was observed in any of the recordings. The alternation of narrow and wide QRS complexes during tachycardia could have been 2:1 right bundle branch block (RBBB). However, this hypothesis does not explain the persistence of RBBB for several consecutive beats, even though RR intervals increased. Thus, answer 2 is incorrect. Answer 3 is incorrect because phase 4 RBBB does not explain the alternation of narrow and wide QRS complex. Moreover, phase 4 block is typical of slow rhythm.

.

References
[1]
M. Costantini.
Intermittent bundle branch block: a clinical model for the study of electrophysiological phenomena.
G Ital Cardiol., 15 (2014), pp. 25-36
[2]
F. Luzza, A. Consolo, G. Oreto.
Bundle branch block in alternate beats: the role of supernormal and concealed bundle branch conduction.
Heart Lung., 24 (1995), pp. 31
Copyright © 2017. Sociedad Española de Cardiología
Idiomas
Revista Española de Cardiología (English Edition)

Subscribe to our newsletter

Article options
Tools
es en

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

es en
Política de cookies Cookies policy
Utilizamos cookies propias y de terceros para mejorar nuestros servicios y mostrarle publicidad relacionada con sus preferencias mediante el análisis de sus hábitos de navegación. Si continua navegando, consideramos que acepta su uso. Puede cambiar la configuración u obtener más información aquí. To improve our services and products, we use "cookies" (own or third parties authorized) to show advertising related to client preferences through the analyses of navigation customer behavior. Continuing navigation will be considered as acceptance of this use. You can change the settings or obtain more information by clicking here.