Sotalol for ventricular tachyarrhythmias: beta-blocking and class III contributions, and relative efficacy versus class I drugs after prior drug failure. ESVEM Investigators. Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring

In the Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial, d,l-sotalol was associated with a lower arrhythmia recurrence and mortality than class I antiarrhythmic drugs. To further evaluate the relative efficacy of d,I-sotalol compared with class I drugs, and to assess the relative importance of its class II (beta-blocking) and class III effects, 6-year arrhythmia recurrence and mortality in patients receiving sotalol were compared with those in patients receiving class I drugs, subdivided according to whether they also received coadministered beta blockers. Relative efficacy was also determined for sotalol and for class I drugs as stratified by the presence/absence of prior drug failure. Arrhythmia recurrence was lower for the 84 patients receiving sotalol than for patients given class I agents with (n = 28) (p = 0.008) or without (n = 184) (p = 0.001) alpha beta blocker. Mortality was lower for patients taking sotalol than for those given a class I drug without alpha beta blocker (p = 0.034), but similar (p = 0.835) if alpha beta blocker was also administered. In contrast to class I drugs, which had lower efficacy rates when prior drug trials had failed, sotalol maintained its efficacy despite prior drug failures preceding or during the ESVEM trial. Both class II and III actions in the ESVEM trial were important to the clinical superiority of sotalol in the treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring in the electrophysiologic study versus electrocardiographic monitoring (ESVEM) trial. ESVEM Investigators

Selection of antiarrhythmic therapy may be based on suppression of spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias assessed by Holter monitoring, but the implications of discordant Holter results on repeat 24-hour monitoring has not been defined. This study examines the frequency and significance of reproducible Holter suppression on two 24-hour recordings in the Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial. Repeat 24-hour Holter monitoring was obtained in patients randomized to the Holter monitor limb of the ESVEM trial, during the same hospitalization, after a drug efficacy prediction. These Holters were not used to define drug efficacy but were subsequently analyzed to determine the reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring. A repeat 24-hour Holter monitor, following the one that predicted drug efficacy, was available in 119 patients. Ninety-nine patients (83%) also had suppression that met efficacy criteria on the second Holter monitor. There were no significant differences in arrhythmia recurrence (p = 0.612) or mortality (p = 0.638) in patients with concordant Holter results (n = 99; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45%; 1-year mortality = 10%) compared with those with discordant Holter results (n = 20; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45%; 1-year mortality = 16%). We conclude that (1) there is discordance between the first effective Holter monitor and a repeat Holter monitor in 17% of patients, and (2) suppression of ventricular ectopic activity on 2 separate 24-hour Holter monitors does not identify a group with a better outcome, nor does failure of suppression on the second Holter monitor identify a group with a worse prognosis.

Implications of the Electrophysiologic Study versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring trial for controlling ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation

The Electrophysiologic Study versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial had 2 objectives. The first was to determine the accuracy of noninvasive versus invasive means of predicting the efficacy of drug treatment for ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF). A second objective was to determine the relative efficacies of 7 antiarrhythmic drugs used in the treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. ESVEM was the first opportunity to compare prospectively the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a variety of antiarrhythmic drugs in the same patient population. No significant difference was observed between suppression of spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias on Holter monitoring and suppression of inducible ventricular arrhythmias by electrophysiologic study (EPS) in terms of the ability to predict the success of drug therapy. There was also no difference in predictive accuracy if patients in the electrophysiologic limb showed suppression by Holter monitoring in addition to suppression by EPS. Sotalol was more effective than the other 6 antiarrhythmic drugs, all class I agents, in preventing death and recurrence of arrhythmia. Efficacy compared with placebo, however, was not evaluated. In the EPS limb, sotalol was also statistically more likely to achieve an efficacy prediction than any of the sodium channel blocking drugs. Amiodarone was not used in ESVEM. It has been suggested that these conclusions, which differ from those of other, less controlled, invasive and noninvasive studies, might be because of the particular efficacy criteria used in the ESVEM protocol. Retrospective analyses of the ESVEM data were performed using more rigid efficacy criteria than were used in the original ESVEM analysis: a greater degree of ectopy suppression was required for Holter monitoring, and more stringent efficacy definitions were required in the stimulation protocol of the EPS limb. Results from the retrospective analyses and other studies support the initial ESVEM conclusions. In patients with both spontaneous and inducible sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias as well as frequent spontaneous premature ventricular contractions, therapy with sotalol (guided by either Holter monitoring or EPS) is a reasonable initial strategy because of its superior initial long-term efficacy and better acute and long-term tolerability compared with sodium channel blocking drugs.

A summary and assessment of the findings and conclusions of the ESVEM trial

The Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial was completed in 1992 and the primary results were reported in 1993. Since then, considerable discussion about this trial has taken place and new trial results have been reported. Trial analysis has yielded seven principal findings to date concerning treatment of patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias, ie: (1) similar accuracy of electrophysiologic study (EPS), Holter monitoring (HM), and EPS combined with HM for predicting antiarrhythmic drug efficacy; (2) greater efficiency and lower cost of HM; (3) improved survival associated with predicted drug efficacy; (4) predictors of response to EPS and HM; (5) greater efficacy and lower cost of therapy with sotalol compared with drugs with class-l effects; (6) lack of a relationship between presenting and recurring arrhythmia; and (7) preponderance of nonarrhythmic deaths in trial participants. A number of additional specific findings of the trial are reviewed in this symposium. Several criticisms of the trial's enrollment, methods, and efficacy criteria are reviewed and discussed. Some criticisms are valid. Many are related to misunderstandings of ESVEM trial methodology and to bias of the individual critics. Some are simply incorrect. The importance of the ESVEM trial in the present day may be limited by the growing use of implanted devices rather than drugs for treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. If clinical trials ultimately prove devices to be no more effective than drugs, the findings of the ESVEM investigators will grow in importance.

Influence of Holter monitor and electrophysiologic study methods and efficacy criteria on the outcome of patients with ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation in the ESVEM trial

Because not all laboratories use the monitoring and stimulation protocols used in the Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial, we reanalyzed the ESVEM patients' data using alternative, commonly used Holter monitor (HM) and programmed stimulation efficacy criteria to determine if different criteria would have changed the trial's conclusions. Also, because beta-blocker use and coronary artery disease frequency were not equally distributed between the two limbs in ESVEM, we reanalyzed the ESVEM data adjusting for the possible effect of these variables. In the HM limb, drug efficacy in the original ESVEM analysis was declared by reduction of total premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) by 70%, pairs by 80%, runs of 3 to 15 beats by 90%, and all ventricular tachycardia (VT) more than 15 beats by 100%. In this analysis, we examine outcome in subjects meeting two more stringent sets of criteria, (1) reduction of total PVCs by 70%, of pairs by 80%, and of all VT by 100% (new criteria set 1) and (2) reduction of total PVCs by 80%, of pairs by 90%, and of all VT by 100% (new criteria set 2). In electrophysiology (EPS) limb patients, we compared arrhythmia recurrence when efficacy was declared with triple extrastimuli as compared with maximally testing with double extrastimuli, and arrhythmia recurrence was compared in patients tested with identical versus any more aggressive protocol on drug than was used before drug. We also compared the predictive accuracy of zero versus 3 to 15, and 0 to 5, 6 to 10, and more than 10 induced beats on drug. Additionally, we compared predictive accuracy of the HM- and EP-guided limbs excluding patients on beta blockers and those with noncoronary disease. Lastly, to determine whether concordant results on HM and EPS testing would provide more accurate efficacy predictions than EP testing alone, HM recordings obtained in EPS-limb patients but not processed or used during the course of the EVSEM study were analyzed. The original ESVEM HM criteria, new set 1, and new set 2 yielded predicted drug efficacy rates of 77%, 68%, and 58%, respectively; however, arrhythmia recurrence rates were unchanged. Similarly, arrhythmia recurrence rates for patients tested with triple versus less than triple extrastimuli (p=.238), more aggressive versus identical protocols (p=.955), and 0 to 5 v 6 to 10 v more than 10 induced beats (p=.263) or 0 v 3 to 15 induced beats (p=.106) were unchanged. in the 215 (of 286) patients with coronary disease and not receiving beta blockers, there was still no difference in arrhythmia recurrence or mortality between the noninvasive and invasive limbs in ESVEM. Lastly, in patients with drug efficacy predictions by EPS testing, there was no difference in outcome in patients who had concordant versus discordant efficacy prediction by simultaneously obtained HMs. The use of more stringent testing methods and efficacy criteria would not have significantly improved the predictive accuracy of drug assessment by HM or EPS in the ESVEM trial. Additionally, excess noncoronary disease in EP-guided patients and excess beta-blocker used in HM-guided patients did not influence the results in the ESVEM trial.

Exploration of the precision of classifying sudden cardiac death. Implications for the interpretation of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

As cardiovascular clinical trials improve in sophistication and therapies target specific cardiac mechanisms of death, a more objective and precise system to identify specific cause of death is needed. Ideally, sudden cardiac death would describe patients dying of ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation. In this context, we explored the precision of current sudden death classification and implications for clinical trials.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Deaths were analyzed in 834 patients who received an automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Three arrhythmia experts used a standard prospective classification system to classify deaths into accepted categories: sudden cardiac, nonsudden cardiac, and noncardiac. New aspects to this study included analysis of autopsy results and ICD interrogation for arrhythmias at the time of death. All of the patients receiving the ICD previously had documented sustained ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation or cardiac arrest. Of the 109 subsequent deaths in the 834-patient database, 17 (16%) were classified as sudden cardiac. Compared with the nonsudden cardiac and noncardiac categories, sudden cardiac death was more often identified in outpatients (59% versus 10%) and witnessed less often (41% versus 86%; both P < .001). The autopsy information contradicted and changed the clinical perception of a "sudden cardiac death" in 7 cases (myocardial infarction [n = 1], pulmonary embolism [n = 2], cerebral infarction [n = 1], ruptured thoracic [n = 1], and abdominal aortic aneurysms [n = 2]). Interpretable ICD interrogation was available in 53% of the deaths (47% unavailable: buried, programmed off, or other technical reasons). When evaluated, only 7 of 17 "sudden deaths" were associated with ICD discharges near the time of death.

CONCLUSIONS

Even in a group of patients with an ICD, deaths classified as sudden cardiac frequently were not associated with ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation and were often noncardiac. It is possible to create a wide range of sudden cardiac death rates (more than fourfold) using the identical clinical database despite objective, prespecified criteria. Autopsy results frequently reveal noncardiac causes of clinical events simulating sudden cardiac death. ICD interrogation revealed that ICD discharges were often related to terminal arrhythmias incidental to the primary pathophysiological process leading to death.

Data-driven Decisions: The Importance of Clinical Trials in Arrhythmia Management

As a result of clinical trials, the measurement of arrhythmias has evolved over the past three decades. In the late 1960s, customary teaching was that ventricular premature depolarizations were dangerous and antiarrhythmic therapy, in hopes of reducing fatal consequences, became common place; however, following clinical trials such as CAST, IMPACT, and SWORD, we learned that, at least in postinfarct patients, arrhythmia suppression may lead to increased rather than reduced mortality. Such trials have led to a marked reduction in therapy of indiscriminate ventricular ectopy and have led to ongoing testing of specific subgroups identified as having particularly higher adverse prognostic risk. With the advent of cardiac monitoring and the confirmation that ventricular tachyarrhythmias are the most common cause for sudden death, their therapy, too, has evolved and matured, again aided by clinical trials. The ESVEM study prospectively examined the role of monitor-guided versus electrophysiologically guided drug therapy of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and confirmed that both approaches may have a role in reducing arrhythmic deaths-though the specific benefits of each technique remain somewhat unsettled. Both the ESVEM and CASCADE studies suggested that the most effective drugs for ventricular tachyarrhythmias are the class II/III drugs, sotalol and amiodarone, both appearing more effective than our older class I agents. These should now be viewed as the first-line drugs for these arrhythmias. The relative benefits of these two agents with respect to each other and to implantable cardioverter defibrillators, however, remains to be determined by further clinical trials, such as AVID and CIDS. The therapy of atrial tachyarrhythmias has similarly evolved with the aid of clinical observations. While rate control is required in all patients with atrial fibrillation, we have come to realize that the applications of antiarrhythmic drugs for the purpose of maintaining sinus rhythm must be used only selectively rather than uniformly. Both a meta-analysis by Coplen and colleagues and a report by the SPAF investigators suggested that with atrial arrhythmias, too, antiarrhythmic drug therapy may result in enhanced rather than reduced mortality in some circumstances. Additional clinical trials are needed to further elucidate the role of antiarrhythmic therapy of atrial fibrillation.

How do physicians determine when to perform an "on-drug" electrophysiology study for efficacy determination in patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias: a previously unaddressed variable that may affect efficacy rates

In patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias, efficacy rates of antiarrhythmic agents, as judged by serial electrophysiological (EP) tests, have been variable. Factors underlying this variability have been reported to include: specific drug, type of arrhythmia, type of heart disease, left ventricular function, and number of prior drug failures. We hypothesized that variability in physician practice behavior as to when a drug assessment is performed might be another important factor affecting drug efficacy. Using a survey sent to 103 electrophysiology centers we determined from the 46 respondents that this is indeed the case. Twenty-six of the 46 respondents always, 9 of 46 sometimes, and 11 of 46 did not require ectopy reduction on continuous electrocardiographic monitoring before proceeding to an EP study. The ectopy reduction required, however, varies among physicians in percentage and type. Twenty-seven of the 35 respondents who utilize rhythm monitoring also require attainment of an acceptable blood level, a prespecified minimal target dose, and/or one or more ECG interval changes prior to proceeding to EP testing. Fifteen out of 46 do not require "therapeutic" drug levels. Of 11 who don't use rhythm monitoring, 5 also don't use blood levels. The lower value for "therapeutic ranges" varied by up to 3-fold and the upper value by up to 2 1/2-fold for individual drugs. The minimum time for testing varied from 1 half-life to over 10 half-lives. Similarly, the response to failure of a submaximal dose also varied: 9% always retested at a high dose, 2% never tested at a higher dose, and 91% were inconsistent. Moreover, what was considered the maximal dose for an individual drug varied by 3- to 6-fold for most agents queried. We believe these variations in dose, time, and coassessment factors must have an influence on efficacy rates of antiarrhythmic agents.

Structural heart disease: its importance in association with antiarrhythmic drug therapy

The presence or absence of structural heart disease is an important factor to consider prior to initiating antiarrhythmic drug therapy with a class I or class III antiarrhythmic agent. An appropriate screen for structural heart disease and other associated proarrhythmic risk factors should include a complete history, physical examination, electrocardiogram (ECG), and echocardiogram in all patients; exercise test and Holter monitoring in many/most selected patients; and a signal-averaged ECG, chest x-ray, and invasive procedures only in selected/occasional patients. Whether and when to obtain the tests that are not indicated for all patients must be determined by each individual physician's practice strategy and philosophy, while keeping in mind the likelihood of finding an abnormality in a particular patient, the arrhythmia being treated, the nature of the drug to be used, and cost-effectiveness issues. Given the low incidence of proarrhythmia under most circumstances, screening for clinically unrecognized structural heart disease may appear difficult to justify in the current era of cost containment. However, due to the potential lethality of proarrhythmia, particularly in patients with structural heart disease, pre-drug assessment is prudent.

A consensus report on antiarrhythmic drug use

During the past few years, a number of new antiarrhythmic agents have become available for use in the United States, encainide has been withdrawn from use, and others have had indications for use modified. Therefore, a meeting of arrhythmia specialists was convened in an attempt to develop guidelines for antiarrhythmic therapy. The resultant discussions and guidelines presented in this article address general issues such as the most important antiarrhythmic drug attributes, as well as therapy for particular arrhythmias such as premature ventricular contractions, ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, ventricular ectopy, and supraventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Electrophysiological testing of sinus node function: diagnostic and prognostic application-including updated information from sinus node electrograms

Sinus node function, including automaticity, conduction, and refractoriness, can be studied in the human electrophysiology laboratory. This review details the current methods used for such studies and discusses their clinical value. Of special emphasis in this article is the role of sinus node electrography in the clinical laboratory. Included also is an update of the data relating the duration of sinus node depolarization as measure on sinus node electrograms to other parameters that assess sinus node function as well as data supporting the direct relationship between the duration of the sinus node depolarization as the severity of sinus node dysfunction.

Optimum duration of transtelephonic ECG monitoring when used for transient symptomatic event detection

Transtelephonic electrocardiographic monitoring (TTM) has been used for postpacemaker follow-up study, postmyocardial infarction monitoring, and transient symptomatic event detection (TSED). For postpacemaker follow-up study, TTM is continued indefinitely. For postmyocardial infarction monitoring, TTM is continued for 1 year or more. For TSED, the appropriate duration for TTM has not yet been adequately assessed. Accordingly, the authors determined the yield, by week, of TTM for TSED. Five thousand fifty-two patients who made 20,590 calls were analyzed for this investigation. Ninety-five percent of patients making symptomatic calls or making a call in which an arrhythmia was documented did so within 5 weeks. Shorter periods would sacrifice yield, longer periods may not be cost-effective.

The duration of the sinus node depolarization on transvenous sinus node electrograms can identify sinus node dysfunction and can suggest its severity

Catheter recorded sinus node electrograms (SNE) allow visualization of sinus node depolarization (SND). The SND on a bipolar SNE is probably a composite reflecting both P cell action potentials and intranodal conduction. Reduced rate of rise, prolonged action potential duration and/or delayed intranodal conduction might each prolong the SND duration. Thus, SND duration might reflect several clinically important sinus node abnormalities and aid in the recognition of sick sinus syndrome. Moreover, the SND duration might be expected to be the most prolonged in patients with the most severe sinus node dysfunction. To test this hypothesis, we determined SND duration in 32 patients and correlated it with the presence or absence of evidence of sinus node dysfunction by ECG and/or electrophysiological (EP) studies. Seven patients had no sinus node dysfunction (group 1); 10 patients had mild sinus node dysfunction (a single abnormality of corrected sinus recovery time, sinoatrial conduction time, PCLp, or ECG) (group 2); and 15 patients had two or more abnormalities electrocardiographically and/or by EP testing (group 3). The SND duration (mean/range) was 129/95-190 msec in group 1, 151/95-225 msec in group 2, and 196/140-260 msec in group 3. In group 3, three patients who had ECG evidence of sick sinus syndrome and abnormalities on all three EP parameters, the SND duration was 230/200-260 msec. Carotid sinus massage (CSM) was found to prolong the SND duration in 5/7 patients in groups 2 and 3 where the SND could be measured both before and during CSM. CSM was necessary to allow visualization of the SND in 3/7 group 1 patients; thus their recorded values may be falsely long. The normal with a SND duration greater than 150 (190 msec) had it measured during CSM. None of the group three patients with SND duration less than msec had a prolonged CSRT or ECG evidence of sick sinus syndrome. Literature review revealed SNE recordings on 18 patients with sick sinus syndrome on which the SND duration could be measured; it was greater than or equal to 200 msec in all. Thus, the SND duration appears to reflect the presence and degree of sinus node dysfunction. Sinus node dysfunction appears unlikely if the SND duration is less than 150 msec and is likely to be severe if the SND duration is greater than 200 msec.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerance of d-sotalol in patients with refractory supraventricular tachyarrhythmias

The efficacy, safety, and electrophysiologic effects of intravenous and oral d-sotalol, an investigational class III antiarrhythmic agent, are not yet well characterized. We evaluated the electrophysiologic, antiarrhythmic, and hemodynamic effects of d-sotalol infusion (1.5 to 2.75 mg/kg) and of chronic oral therapy (200 to 400 mg bid) in 10 patients with chronic, paroxysmal supraventricular tachyarrhythmias refractory to 5 +/- 2 standard agents. Four patients had paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT), four had paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, two had atrial flutter, and one had nonparoxysmal reciprocating junctional tachycardia (NPRJT). PSVT was inducible or spontaneously present in 4 of 4 before d-sotalol. After intravenous d-sotalol PSVT was noninducible in three patients and slowed by 40% in one. Atrial fibrillation was inducible or spontaneously present in 4 of 4 before therapy. After intravenous d-sotalol, one became noninducible, and three achieved rate-slowing (the mean falling from 69 to 61 bpm). In one patient, atrial flutter became noninducible; in another, d-sotalol slowed the rate of atrial flutter by 28%. D-sotalol restored sinus rhythm in the patient with NPRJT. Intravenous d-sotalol increased the sinus cycle length; the QTc, PR, and AH intervals; and the AV nodal functional refractory period, the AV nodal effective refractory period; and the right ventricular effective refractory period significantly. The atrial effective refractory period, sinoatrial conduction time, and corrected sinus recovery time tended to increase, but did not reach statistical significance. The QRS, PA, and HV intervals did not change. Mean BP fell 13.4 +/- 9.2% after intravenous d-sotalol, but no adverse symptoms developed.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Relation of baseline characteristics to suppression of ventricular arrhythmias during placebo and active antiarrhythmic therapy in patients after myocardial infarction

In the Cardiac Arrhythmia Pilot Study (CAPS), patients early (6-60 days) after acute myocardial infarction (MI) with ventricular premature complexes (VPCs) of over 10 per hour were randomized to receive, unaware, therapy with one of four antiarrhythmic drugs (n = 402) or placebo (n = 100). Treatment success was defined as 70% or more decrease in VPC rate and 90% or more decrease in VPC runs. If the first active drug was ineffective, a second drug was given. If placebo was ineffective, a second placebo was given. To determine whether or not baseline clinical characteristics predict the response to antiarrhythmic therapy, 10 baseline variables were selected for investigation: age, prior MI, time from CAPS MI to randomization, ejection fraction, baseline VPC frequency, presence of runs (greater than or equal to 3 consecutive VPCs, greater than or equal to 100 beats/min), beta-blocker therapy, digitalis therapy, MI transmurality, and MI location. At the end of the first drug treatment, apparent treatment success in patients receiving placebo was associated on univariate analysis with absence of prior MI, with trends for younger age and Q wave MI, whereas in patients receiving active therapies, higher ejection fraction and younger age were associated with better suppression. In the encainide and flecainide treatments, where the greatest response was observed, absence of prior MI, higher ejection fraction, and younger age were associated with more successful treatment. In a multivariate analysis with these variables, ejection fraction and age remained significant for all active therapies, absence of prior MI and ejection fraction remained significant in the encainide and flecainide treatments, and absence of prior MI in the placebo treatment. Few variables except ejection fraction were associated with VPC suppression during the 1-year follow-up, and only lower ejection fraction and older age related to loss of long-term suppression. Thus, there are only a few independent baseline clinical variables (notably, ejection fraction) that substantially affect antiarrhythmic drug efficacy in suppressing VPCs in patients early after MI. Some variables, however, may be associated with spontaneous arrhythmia variability, leading to an apparent (placebo) response. These findings will be helpful in designing and interpreting treatment studies in patients after MI.

Electrophysiologic evaluation of sinus node function

Sinus node dysfunction can be evaluated by invasive and noninvasive means. In this article, invasive testing of sinus node function and its clinical utility are reviewed. Sinus recovery times, sinoatrial conduction times, sinus node refractory periods, and sinus node electrograms are all reviewed in detail, with regard to both theory and practice.

Phase analysis of gated blood pool scintigraphic images to localize bypass tracts in Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome

The ability of radionuclide techniques to localize bypass tracts in patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome to sites around the atrioventricular (AV) ring using a three view triangulation method was investigated. In 17 patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome, phase images were generated from gated blood pool scans using the first Fourier harmonic of the time-activity curve of each pixel. In addition, the difference between left and right ventricular mean phase angles was calculated for each patient and for 13 control subjects. Bypass tracts were localized to one or more sites on a 10 site grid schematically superimposed on the AV ring (Duke grid) by electrophysiologic study in all patients and by intraoperative mapping in 7 of the 17 patients. These same 10 anatomic sites were projected onto three scintigraphic views and the site of earliest ventricular phase angle was located in each view. The 10 sites around the AV ring were divided into two anatomic groups: free wall and septal/paraseptal. Phase image locations correlated with electrophysiologic locations within one grid site in 11 of 11 patients with free wall tracts and were confirmed at surgery in 5 of the 11. In five of six patients with septal/paraseptal tracts, electrophysiologic study could not localize the bypass tract to one site, whereas phase images localized two of the five as free wall adjacent to the septum, one as paraseptal and two as true posteroseptal. One posteroseptal site was confirmed at surgery. In one patient, in whom phase image analysis and electrophysiologic study showed different sites, existence of both tracts was confirmed at surgery.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)