Electrophysiology studies in @entity1 with XXXX .

@entity1 @entity296 @entity384 @entity1163 @entity370 @entity1526 @entity5036 @entity741 @entity299 @entity453 @entity1167 @entity943
@entity384 is a diverse group of @entity299 with variable @entity943 substrates. The response to programmed stimulation is dependent on spontaneous @entity943 presentation. In @entity1 with @entity384 , the majority of sustained monomorphic VT is caused by a scar-related reentrant mechanism, similar to that of @entity453 . The @entity943 is uniformly inducible and is often refractory to pharmacologic therapy. Sustained VT is associated with more extensive @entity296 and non-uniform anisotropy, involving both the endocardium and epicardium, compared to those without sustained reentry. The response to programmed stimulation is more variable in @entity1 presenting with nonsustained @entity943 , @entity1167 or @entity1163 . Inducibility of monomorphic VT is much lower compared to those with @entity741 . Other non-reentrant mechanism, such as focal automaticity, can also be observed in @entity1 with monomorphic VT, in the absence of @entity296 or evidence of slow conduction. The utility of electrophysiology studies to determine prognosis and to guide therapy remains limited in this @entity1 population. The clinical outcome does not correlate with @entity943 inducibility, and suppression of induced @entity943 does not predict a good prognosis. The diagnosis of @entity370 or @entity1526 ' @entity296 should be considered in @entity1 with @entity384 of unknown etiology, particularly in those with marked regional wall motion abnormalities and inducible VT. Epicardial reentrant circuits may be more prevalent in these @entity296 , especially in those with VT related to chronic @entity1526 . Although bundle branch reentry VT is a common finding in @entity1 with @entity384 , it can occur in @entity296 of any type and may coexist with other myocardial reentrant VT. It often has a @entity5036 QRS pattern during VT and is associated with His-Purkinje conduction delay. Evidence of macroreentry involving the bundle branches can usually be demonstrated, and catheter ablation of the bundle branches provides an effective and specific treatment.
