This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by McAnulty, J. H. Articles by Rahimtoola, S. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by McAnulty, J. H. Articles by Rahimtoola, S. H.

Circulation, Vol 59, 1035-1039, Copyright © 1979 by American Heart Association

ARTICLES

Prospective evaluation of intrahisian conduction delay

JH McAnulty, E Murphy and SH Rahimtoola

We prospectively evaluated 46 patients who had intrahisian conduction delay. Twenty-three had a split His potential and 23 had a prolonged HV interval with a normal QRS complex. In those with a split His, the interval between the two His potentials averaged 32.7 msec (range 9--90 msec); in nine patients this split His was demonstrated only by atrial pacing. The 20 patients from this group with 1:1 atrioventricular conduction have been followed for an average of 18.1 months (range 2-- 48 months). All are alive. Three have had syncope, but Holter monitoring revealed no bradyarrhythmias. In the 23 patients with a narrow QRS and prolonged HV interval, the HV interval averaged 73.7 msec (range 57--180 msec). Twelve of these patients received pacemakers at the time of the His bundle study, six had symptomatic atrioventricular block and five had symptomatic sinus pauses. The 11 patients who did not receive pacemakers have been followed for an average of 15.1 months (range 2--44 months). In three with recurrent syncope and five with dizziness, monitoring has revealed no bradyarrhythmias. One patient died from a myocardial infarction without arrhythmias. Further prospective evaluation of patients with intrahisian conduction delay without documented bradyarrhythmias is needed, but with follow-up averaging 17 months and up to 4 years, patients with intrahisian conduction delay and without documented bradyarrhythmias appear not to require prophylactic permanent pacemakers to decrease morbidity or mortality.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Phibbs, H. S. Friedman, T. B. Graboys, B. Lown, H. J. L. Marriott, W. P. Nelson, and T. Preston Indications for Pacing in the Treatment of Bradyarrhythmias: Report of an Independent Study Group JAMA, September 14, 1984; 252(10): 1307 - 1311. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. K. Bhandari and S. H. Rahimtoola Indications for Cardiac Pacing in Patients With Bradyarrhythmias: Do We Know All the Answers? JAMA, September 14, 1984; 252(10): 1327 - 1328. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. K. Kwoh, J. R. Beck, and S. G. Pauker Repeated Syncope with Negative Diagnostic Evaluation: To Pace or Not To Pace? Med Decis Making, January 1, 1984; 4(3): 351 - 377. [PDF]

				B. PHIBBS H-V Interval Prolongation Ann Intern Med, September 1, 1983; 99(3): 414 - 414. [Abstract] [PDF]