[Follow-up studies in 64 @entity1 with XXXX after electrostimulation].

@entity1 @entity591 @entity9930 @entity955 @entity4924 @entity3153 @entity943 @entity204
In 65 out of 79 @entity1 with @entity3153 who had extensive electrostimulation studies, a follow-up evaluation (mean follow-up period 2.5 years) was performed. The @entity1 were divided into 2 groups: Group 1: No therapy or therapy only during @entity591 . Group 2: Continuous oral drug therapy. There was no difference of antegrade and retrograde refractory periods, but there was a significant difference in the initiation of @entity591 . In group 1, the typical @entity591 using the AV node antegradely and the accessory pathway retrogradely was predominant, while in group 2, complex @entity943 ( @entity955 + @entity591 , @entity591 using the accessory pathway in both directions, @entity591 + AV-nodal @entity591 , isolated @entity955 ) during electrostimulation could be induced. all except 1 @entity1 in whom no @entity591 could be initiated were in group 1 (statistically significant difference). Thus the type of @entity591 which can be initiated during electrostimulation is a better predictor for the condition in the follow-up period than the refractory period. As concomitant disease there were 4 cases with @entity4924 (2 had additional @entity9930 ) and 3 cases with @entity9930 . 3 of the 4 @entity1 with @entity4924 were in group 2. 1 of the 64 @entity1 died during the follow-up period suddenly, but the cause of @entity204 is not known and possibly due to medical therapy. The mortality in a non-selected group of @entity1 with @entity3153 seems to be very low.
