Abstract
As recently described by Moe et al., parasystolic modulation implies that the ectopic cycle length of a parasystolic focus can be increased or decreased by electrical influences transmitted across the zone of protection. A search for this phenomenon was made in nine patients with intermittent ventricular parasystole resulting from protection only during specific portions of the cycle. All nine patients had a period of relatively early protection affecting the initial 55–67% of the cycle preceding a period of resetting during which the parasystolic focus was discharged and fully recycled. In addition, two patients had a period of relatively late parasystolic protection. Pseudo‐resetting (apparent resetting in the surface leads without interruption of activity within the parasystolic focus itself), seen throughout the entire period of late protection in these two patients, and during the relatively refractory period in one patient, was identified because the R waves causing apparent resetting were encompassed by parasystolic‐to‐parasystolic intervals equalling twice the ectopic cycle length. Our findings indicate that parasystolic modulation did not occur in the type of intermittent ventricular parasystole included in this study. That is, the parasystolic focus was either not affected (not modulated) during specific (early or late) portions of the cycle, or normally reset (discharged and fully recycled, but neither depressed, nor enhanced) in other portions of (he cycle. This study does not exclude the occurrence of modulation in other types of parasystole, nor in some automatic nonparasystolic rhythms.
