Anderson R H, Ho S Y, Becker A E
Cardiac Unit, Institute of Child Health, University College, London WC1N 1EH, United Kingdom.
Anat Rec. 2000 Sep 1;260(1):81-91. doi: 10.1002/1097-0185(20000901)260:1<81::AID-AR90>3.0.CO;2-3.
There have been suggestions made recently that our understanding of the atrioventricular junctions of the heart is less than adequate, with claims for several new findings concerning the arrangement of the ordinary working myocardium and the specialised pathways for atrioventricular conduction. In reality, these claims are grossly exaggerated. The structure and architecture of the pathways for conduction between the atrial and ventricular myocardium are exactly as described by Tawara nearly 100 years ago. The recent claims stem from a failure to assess histological findings in the light of criterions established by Monckeberg and Aschoff following a similar controversy in 1910. The atrioventricular junctions are the areas where the atrial myocardium inserts into, and is separated from, the base of the ventricular mass, apart from at the site of penetration of the specialised axis for atrioventricular conduction. There are two such junctions in the normal heart, surrounding the orifices of the mitral and tricuspid valves. The true septal area between the junctions is of very limited extent, being formed by the membranous septum. Posterior and inferior to this septal area, the atrial myocardium overlies the crest of the ventricular septum, with the atrial component being demarcated by the landmarks of the triangle of Koch. The adjacent structures, and in particular the so-called inferior pyramidal space, were accurately described by McAlpine (Heart and Coronary Arteries, 1975). Thus, again there is no need for revision of our understanding. The key to unravelling much of the alleged controversy is the recognition that, as indicated by Tawara, the atrioventricular node becomes the atrioventricular bundle at the point where the overall axis for conduction penetrates into the central fibrous body. There are also marked differences in arrangement, also described by Tawara, between the disposition of the conduction axis in man as compared to the dog.
最近有人提出,我们对心脏房室交界区的理解还不够充分,有人声称发现了一些关于普通工作心肌的排列以及房室传导特殊通路的新情况。实际上,这些说法被严重夸大了。心房和心室心肌之间传导通路的结构和构造与近100年前塔瓦拉所描述的完全一样。最近的这些说法源于未能根据1910年类似争议后蒙克贝格和阿绍夫确立的标准来评估组织学发现。房室交界区是心房心肌插入心室肌底部并与之分离的区域,房室传导特殊轴的穿透部位除外。正常心脏中有两个这样的交界区,围绕着二尖瓣和三尖瓣口。交界区之间真正的间隔区域范围非常有限,由膜性间隔构成。在这个间隔区域的后方和下方,心房心肌覆盖在室间隔嵴上,心房部分由科赫三角的标志界定。相邻结构,特别是所谓的下锥体间隙,麦卡尔平(《心脏与冠状动脉》,1975年)曾有准确描述。因此,同样没有必要修正我们的理解。解开诸多所谓争议的关键在于认识到,正如塔瓦拉所指出的,房室结在传导总轴穿透中心纤维体的点处变成房室束。与狗相比,人的传导轴排列也存在塔瓦拉所描述的显著差异。