Epstein A E, Dailey S M, Shepard R B, Kirk K A, Kay G N, Plumb V J
Department of Medicine, University of Alabama, Birmingham 35294.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1991 Jul;14(7):1169-78. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1991.tb02848.x.
Signal-averaged electrocardiography has been used to identify patients at risk for arrhythmic death after myocardial infarction. Since patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are at high risk for arrhythmic events, they should also be expected to have a high incidence of abnormal signal-averaged electrocardiograms (SAECGs). However, whether the SAECG can discriminate patients who will have arrhythmia recurrence and receive appropriate ICD shocks from those who will have no recurrence and no shocks is unknown. This study examines the usefulness of the SAECG to separate appropriate users from non-users of the ICD. Fifty patients with ICDs participated in this study. Those who received a shock preceded by symptoms, a shock without preceding symptoms but with electrocardiographic documentation of ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia, or a shock while asleep were classified as ICD users. All other patients were classified as nonusers. The SAECG was classified as normal if the QRS duration on the standard electrocardiogram was less than or equal to 110 msec and if the total filtered QRS duration was less than 120 msec, the root-mean square voltage of the terminal 40 msec was greater than 25 muV, and the terminal low amplitude signal duration measured less than 38 msec. The SAECG was classified as abnormal if the QRS duration on the standard electrocardiogram was less than or equal to 110 msec and any one of these three criteria were outside the "normal range." The SAECG was classified as indeterminate if the QRS duration on the standard 12-lead electrocardiogram was greater than 110 msec. For the entire group of 50 patients, 8 (16%), 12 (24%), and 30 (60%) had normal, abnormal, and indeterminate SAECGs, respectively. Of the 22 ICD users, 1 (5%), 5 (23%), and 16 (73%) patients had normal, abnormal, and indeterminate SAECGs, respectively. Of the 28 ICD nonusers, 7 (25%), 7 (25%), and 14 (50%) patients had normal, abnormal, and indeterminate SAECGs, respectively. ICD users had lower left ventricular ejection fractions (P = 0.0002), a higher incidence of ventricular tachycardia (P = 0.04), prior exposure to a greater number of antiarrhythmic drugs (P = 0.04), and a lower likelihood for survival (P = 0.02) compared to the ICD nonusers. There was no statistically significant difference between the ICD users and nonusers as stratified by SAECG classification regardless of whether or not the interminate studies were included or excluded from the analysis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
信号平均心电图已被用于识别心肌梗死后有发生心律失常性死亡风险的患者。由于植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)患者发生心律失常事件的风险很高,因此他们的信号平均心电图(SAECG)异常发生率也应较高。然而,SAECG能否区分会发生心律失常复发并接受适当ICD电击的患者与不会复发且不会接受电击的患者尚不清楚。本研究探讨SAECG在区分ICD适当使用者和非使用者方面的作用。50例ICD患者参与了本研究。那些在出现症状后接受电击、在没有前驱症状但有室颤或室性心动过速心电图记录的情况下接受电击、或在睡眠时接受电击的患者被归类为ICD使用者。所有其他患者被归类为非使用者。如果标准心电图上的QRS波时限小于或等于110毫秒,且总滤波QRS波时限小于120毫秒、终末40毫秒的均方根电压大于25微伏、终末低振幅信号时限小于38毫秒,则SAECG被分类为正常。如果标准心电图上的QRS波时限小于或等于110毫秒,且这三个标准中的任何一个超出“正常范围”,则SAECG被分类为异常。如果标准12导联心电图上的QRS波时限大于110毫秒,则SAECG被分类为不确定。在这50例患者的整个组中,分别有8例(16%)、12例(24%)和30例(60%)的SAECG为正常、异常和不确定。在22例ICD使用者中,分别有1例(5%)、5例(23%)和16例(73%)患者的SAECG为正常、异常和不确定。在28例ICD非使用者中,分别有7例(25%)、7例(25%)和14例(50%)患者的SAECG为正常、异常和不确定。与ICD非使用者相比,ICD使用者的左心室射血分数较低(P = 0.00