[Is the transesophageal approach preferable to endocavitary approach in the evaluation of XXXX ?].

@entity1 @entity591 @entity955 @entity3044 @entity3153
Now that the radical treatment of the @entity3153 is established, it is essential to evaluate the prognosis of this condition accurately. Initiation of @entity955 is one of the factors which influence the prognosis. The aim of this study was to compare the results of electrophysiological studies performed by the endocavitary and transoesophageal approaches in the measurement of the initiation of @entity955 . Twenty-six @entity1 with a patent @entity3153 were studied by the two methods with a similar protocol: incremental atrial pacing to the Wenckebach point, programmed atrial stimulation using up to two extrastimuli, repeated with an infusion of 20 to 30 ug of @entity3044 . Sixteen @entity1 had reciprocating @entity591 or were asymptomatic (group I) and the other 10 had spontaneous @entity955 (group II). In group I, @entity955 was induced in 9 cases (56%) by the endocavitary and in two cases (12.5%) by the transoesophageal method. In group II, spontaneous @entity955 was reproduced in all cases by the endocavitary and transoesophageal protocols. None of the @entity1 in group I developed @entity955 during follow-up (average 2 years +/- 9 months). The authors observe that all spontaneous @entity955 of the @entity3153 can be triggered by oesophageal stimulation. The prevalence of @entity955 was overestimated by endocavitary studies in asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic @entity1 . The assessment of atrial vulnerability of a @entity3153 may therefore be performed by transoesophageal electro-physiological studies.
