DiCarlo L A, Jenkins J M, Chiang C M, Winston S A, Silka M J, Matney K
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, College of Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1992 Nov;15(11 Pt 2):2154-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1992.tb03039.x.
While algorithms for bipolar intraventricular electrogram analysis have potential use in complementing rate criteria for ventricular tachycardia (VT) detection by implantable antitachycardia devices, the sensitivity of such algorithms to the intracavitary site of electrogram detection has not been determined. In this study, unfiltered (1-500 Hz) electrograms were recorded from a bipolar electrode catheter initially positioned at the right ventricular (RV) apex (site 1) of 12 patients during sinus rhythm (SR1) and during induced monomorphic VT (VT1). Sinus rhythm (SR2) and the identical VT (VT2) were recorded a second time after repositioning the same electrode catheter within the RV apex (site 2) 7-44 mm (mean +/- SD = 15 +/- 10) from its original site. The data were digitized at 1,000 Hz. Templates from SR1 and SR2, respectively, were compared subsequently with individual intraventricular electrograms from 15-25 sec passages of SR1 and VT1 and SR2 and VT2, respectively, using correlation waveform analysis. At site 1, the mean patient correlation coefficient ranged from 0.982-0.998 during SR1 and 0.062-0.975 during VT1. At site 2, the mean patient correlation coefficient ranged from 0.995-0.998 during SR2 and 0.113-0.983 during VT2. Using a correlation threshold of 0.9, VT was differentiated from SR in 11/12 patients (91%) overall: 8/12 patients (67%) at site 1, 9/12 patients (75%) at site 2, and 6/12 patients (50%) at both sites. Thus, while discrimination of VT from SR is feasible with morphological analysis of bipolar right ventricular intracavitary electrograms, the accuracy of bipolar intraventricular electrogram analysis may depend upon intracavitary electrode location in selected patients.
虽然双极心室内电图分析算法在补充植入式抗心动过速装置检测室性心动过速(VT)的心率标准方面具有潜在用途,但此类算法对电图检测的心腔内部位的敏感性尚未确定。在本研究中,在12例患者的窦性心律(SR1)和诱发的单形性室性心动过速(VT1)期间,从最初置于右心室(RV)心尖(部位1)的双极电极导管记录未滤波(1 - 500 Hz)的电图。在将同一电极导管重新定位在RV心尖内距其原始部位7 - 44 mm(平均±标准差 = 15 ± 10)的部位2后,再次记录窦性心律(SR2)和相同的室性心动过速(VT2)。数据以1000 Hz数字化。随后分别使用相关波形分析将来自SR1和SR2的模板与分别来自SR1和VT1以及SR2和VT2的15 - 25秒时段的个体心室内电图进行比较。在部位1,患者的平均相关系数在SR1期间为0.982 - 0.998,在VT1期间为0.062 - 0.975。在部位2,患者的平均相关系数在SR2期间为0.995 - 0.998,在VT2期间为0.113 - 0.983。使用0.9的相关阈值,总体上在12例患者中有11例(91%)将室性心动过速与窦性心律区分开:在部位1为8/12例患者(67%),在部位2为9/12例患者(75%),在两个部位均为6/12例患者(50%)。因此,虽然通过双极右心室心腔内电图的形态分析将室性心动过速与窦性心律区分开来是可行的,但双极心室内电图分析的准确性可能取决于选定患者的心腔内电极位置。