Submited on: 26 Oct 2010 05:02:29 AM GMT
Published on: 26 Oct 2010 11:38:19 AM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    The Authors report their experience with the QRS duration among children requiring RV apical pacing.  They demonstrate, not unexpectedly, that the mean QRS duration increases with advancing age groups.  These are descriptive but interesting observations.   These observations call into question the use of the QRS duration as a criterion for CRT in children.


    There are a few points that must be mentioned as relates to CRT. 


    First, the title of the manuscript is somewhat misleading.  The title suggests that the QRS duration was measured serially and longitudinally in this population. Rather, these data reflect the mean duration for advancing age groups.


    Second, these data do not help with defining the criterion of the appropriate QRS duration for CRT selection in children.  No measures of LV function were included.   In addition, no mention of functional classification is given.  Thus, these data do not allow us to conclude that there is or is not a threshold value of QRS duration that predicts a positive response to CRT in children.  The Authors should be very careful to include this as a significant limitation.

  • Competing interests:
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
  • References:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Extensive experience in pacing and CRT in adults and children

  • How to cite:  Kay G N.Review of Evolution of Paced and Non-paced QRS with RVA pacing[Review of the article 'Evolution Of The Paced And Non-paced Qrs Duration With Chronic Right Ventricular Pacing In Pediatric Patients With And Without Structural Heart Disease ' by Szili-Torok T].WebmedCentral 2011;2(2):WMCRW00490
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse