Zane Christmyer, Meghana Pisupati, Maully J Shah, Chandra Srinivasan, Victoria L Vetter, V Ramesh Iyer, Mary Triguba, Christopher M Janson
{"title":"小儿沃尔夫-帕金森-怀特症的风险分层:儿科心脏病专家和电生理学家的实践差异。","authors":"Zane Christmyer, Meghana Pisupati, Maully J Shah, Chandra Srinivasan, Victoria L Vetter, V Ramesh Iyer, Mary Triguba, Christopher M Janson","doi":"10.1007/s00246-023-03247-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Published guidelines provide recommendations for risk stratification in pediatric Wolff-Parkinson-White (WPW). There are no data on provider concordance with these guidelines. We hypothesized that significant practice variation exists between pediatric cardiologists (PC) and electrophysiologists (EP).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The records of all patients, age 8 to 21 years, with a new ECG diagnosis of WPW between 1/1/2013 and 12/31/2018, from a single center, were retrospectively reviewed. Subjects were categorized on the basis of symptoms and resting ECG findings as one of the following: asymptomatic intermittent WPW, asymptomatic persistent WPW, or symptomatic WPW. The performance and results of diagnostic testing, including Holter monitor, event monitor, exercise stress test (EST), and electrophysiology study (EPS), were recorded. The primary outcome was concordance with published guidelines. A secondary outcome was documentation of a discussion of sudden cardiac death (SCD) risk.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>615 patient encounters were analyzed in 231 patients with newly diagnosed WPW pattern on ECG (56% male; mean age at diagnosis 13.9 ± 2.5 years). EP were observed to have a significantly higher rate of guideline concordance than PC (95% vs. 71%, p < 0.001). There was significant practice variation between PC and EP in the documentation of a discussion of SCD risk: 96% in EP vs. 39% in PC (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Significant practice variation exists in the non-invasive and invasive risk stratification of pediatric WPW, with lower concordance to published guidelines amongst PC, when compared to EP. This report highlights the need to promote awareness of current WPW guidelines in the pediatric cardiology community at large.</p>","PeriodicalId":19814,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"1668-1675"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk Stratification in Pediatric Wolff-Parkinson-White: Practice Variation Among Pediatric Cardiologists and Electrophysiologists.\",\"authors\":\"Zane Christmyer, Meghana Pisupati, Maully J Shah, Chandra Srinivasan, Victoria L Vetter, V Ramesh Iyer, Mary Triguba, Christopher M Janson\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00246-023-03247-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Published guidelines provide recommendations for risk stratification in pediatric Wolff-Parkinson-White (WPW). There are no data on provider concordance with these guidelines. We hypothesized that significant practice variation exists between pediatric cardiologists (PC) and electrophysiologists (EP).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The records of all patients, age 8 to 21 years, with a new ECG diagnosis of WPW between 1/1/2013 and 12/31/2018, from a single center, were retrospectively reviewed. Subjects were categorized on the basis of symptoms and resting ECG findings as one of the following: asymptomatic intermittent WPW, asymptomatic persistent WPW, or symptomatic WPW. The performance and results of diagnostic testing, including Holter monitor, event monitor, exercise stress test (EST), and electrophysiology study (EPS), were recorded. The primary outcome was concordance with published guidelines. A secondary outcome was documentation of a discussion of sudden cardiac death (SCD) risk.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>615 patient encounters were analyzed in 231 patients with newly diagnosed WPW pattern on ECG (56% male; mean age at diagnosis 13.9 ± 2.5 years). EP were observed to have a significantly higher rate of guideline concordance than PC (95% vs. 71%, p < 0.001). There was significant practice variation between PC and EP in the documentation of a discussion of SCD risk: 96% in EP vs. 39% in PC (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Significant practice variation exists in the non-invasive and invasive risk stratification of pediatric WPW, with lower concordance to published guidelines amongst PC, when compared to EP. This report highlights the need to promote awareness of current WPW guidelines in the pediatric cardiology community at large.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19814,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pediatric Cardiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1668-1675\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pediatric Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00246-023-03247-1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00246-023-03247-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Risk Stratification in Pediatric Wolff-Parkinson-White: Practice Variation Among Pediatric Cardiologists and Electrophysiologists.
Background: Published guidelines provide recommendations for risk stratification in pediatric Wolff-Parkinson-White (WPW). There are no data on provider concordance with these guidelines. We hypothesized that significant practice variation exists between pediatric cardiologists (PC) and electrophysiologists (EP).
Method: The records of all patients, age 8 to 21 years, with a new ECG diagnosis of WPW between 1/1/2013 and 12/31/2018, from a single center, were retrospectively reviewed. Subjects were categorized on the basis of symptoms and resting ECG findings as one of the following: asymptomatic intermittent WPW, asymptomatic persistent WPW, or symptomatic WPW. The performance and results of diagnostic testing, including Holter monitor, event monitor, exercise stress test (EST), and electrophysiology study (EPS), were recorded. The primary outcome was concordance with published guidelines. A secondary outcome was documentation of a discussion of sudden cardiac death (SCD) risk.
Results: 615 patient encounters were analyzed in 231 patients with newly diagnosed WPW pattern on ECG (56% male; mean age at diagnosis 13.9 ± 2.5 years). EP were observed to have a significantly higher rate of guideline concordance than PC (95% vs. 71%, p < 0.001). There was significant practice variation between PC and EP in the documentation of a discussion of SCD risk: 96% in EP vs. 39% in PC (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Significant practice variation exists in the non-invasive and invasive risk stratification of pediatric WPW, with lower concordance to published guidelines amongst PC, when compared to EP. This report highlights the need to promote awareness of current WPW guidelines in the pediatric cardiology community at large.
期刊介绍:
The editor of Pediatric Cardiology welcomes original manuscripts concerning all aspects of heart disease in infants, children, and adolescents, including embryology and anatomy, physiology and pharmacology, biochemistry, pathology, genetics, radiology, clinical aspects, investigative cardiology, electrophysiology and echocardiography, and cardiac surgery. Articles which may include original articles, review articles, letters to the editor etc., must be written in English and must be submitted solely to Pediatric Cardiology.