Greenspon A J, Volosin K
Department of Medicine, Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, PA.
Am Heart J. 1990 Jan;119(1):29-34. doi: 10.1016/s0002-8703(05)80077-8.
The effects of atrial pacing on the signal-averaged electrocardiogram were studied in 14 patients with remote myocardial infarction and a history of cardiac arrest or sustained ventricular tachycardia (group I) and in 13 patients with coronary artery disease and no history of sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia (group II). Recordings of the signal-averaged electrocardiogram were obtained at control and during atrial pacing at rates of 80, 100, and 120 beats/min. All patients had recordings analyzed from at least two paced rates. At control, the mean high frequency total duration of the QRS complex (HFTD) was significantly longer in group I versus group II patients (123 +/- 5.6 versus 111 +/- 3.5 msec, p less than 0.05). Although the duration of the QRS signal under 40 microV (D40) was higher in group I versus group II patients (42 +/- 4.7 versus 32.4 +/- 3.5 msec) and the root mean square amplitude of the terminal 40 msec QRS (RMSA) was lower in the group I patients (27 +/- 7.5 versus 38.1 +/- 8.8 microV), these differences did not achieve statistical significance. There was no effect of atrial pacing on the measured signal-averaged parameters of HFTD, D40, and RMSA. Although there was a difference between group I and group II at each paced rate analyzed, atrial pacing did not help to further stratify the groups. In patients with coronary artery disease, atrial pacing is not a useful method of stratifying high-risk patients. Changes in serial signal-averaged electrocardiograms from the same patient are not due to heart rate variability.
在14例有陈旧性心肌梗死且有心脏骤停或持续性室性心动过速病史的患者(I组)和13例有冠状动脉疾病但无持续性室性快速性心律失常病史的患者(II组)中,研究了心房起搏对信号平均心电图的影响。在对照状态以及心房以80、100和120次/分钟的频率起搏期间获取信号平均心电图记录。所有患者均有至少两个起搏频率下的记录分析。在对照状态下,I组患者的QRS波群高频总时限(HFTD)均值显著长于II组患者(123±5.6对111±3.5毫秒,p<0.05)。虽然I组患者低于40微伏的QRS信号时限(D40)高于II组患者(42±4.7对32.4±3.5毫秒),且I组患者终末40毫秒QRS波的均方根振幅(RMSA)较低(27±7.5对38.1±8.8微伏),但这些差异未达到统计学显著性。心房起搏对测量的HFTD、D40和RMSA信号平均参数无影响。虽然在分析的每个起搏频率下I组和II组之间存在差异,但心房起搏无助于进一步对两组进行分层。在冠状动脉疾病患者中,心房起搏不是对高危患者进行分层的有用方法。同一患者连续信号平均心电图的变化并非由于心率变异性所致。