Hogg K J, Lees K R, Hornung R S, Howie C A, Dunn F G, Hillis W S
Department of Materia Medica, University of Glasgow, Stobhill General Hospital.
Br Heart J. 1989 Jun;61(6):489-95. doi: 10.1136/hrt.61.6.489.
There is a need for a simple clinical measurement that will indicate the extent of myocardial salvage after successful thrombolysis. This study examined whether coronary artery reperfusion reduced the infarct size as assessed electrocardiographically after thrombolytic treatment. The sum of the (sigma) ST segment area in leads showing ST segment elevation in the 12 lead electrocardiogram at presentation was used as an index of potential myocardial injury (initial ischaemic index). The evolved infarct size at 48 h was assessed by a QRS scoring system. Two groups of patients, both admitted with anterior myocardial infarction within 6 h of onset, were studied. Group 1 (n = 35) received analgesia only and group 2 (n = 33) received thrombolytic treatment either by the intracoronary (streptokinase, n = 13) or intravenous route (anistreplase, n = 20). Reperfusion was assessed angiographically. The mean (SD) potential infarct size assessed by the initial ischaemic index was similar in both groups (group 1, sigma ST area = 115 (60) mm2 and group 2 = 126 (77 mm2). The QRS score representing evolved infarct size was significantly lower in the treated group (4.1 (2.5] than in group 1 (7.8 (2.6]. The 95% confidence intervals for QRS scores based on the admission sigma ST area from patients with successful reperfusion were applied to a third set of patients (n = 22) to test the ability of the admission ST area (myocardial injury) to predict the QRS score accurately. While patients with successful reperfusion had significantly lower QRS scores than those who did not (4.5 (3.1) versus 9.3 (3.4)), the wide confidence intervals caused by inter-individual variability precluded an accurate prediction of the QRS score in an individual from the sigma ST area at time of presentation. There was no difference in infarct size in patients treated early (</= 3 h) (QRS score 4.2(2.8)) or later (3-6 h) (4.1(2.1)). This study provides evidence that sequential electrocardiographic changes are reduced in patients with anterior infarction who achieve reperfusion after thrombolytic treatment and that this benefit is shown with treatment given up to six hours after infarct onset. None the less, the relation between the initial ischaemic index and the evolved QRS score has wide confidence intervals, reflecting inter-individual variability, and does not allow the prediction of a QRS score in an individual patient.
需要一种简单的临床测量方法来指示成功溶栓后心肌挽救的程度。本研究探讨了冠状动脉再灌注是否能在溶栓治疗后通过心电图评估减少梗死面积。将入院时12导联心电图显示ST段抬高导联的ST段面积总和(∑)用作潜在心肌损伤的指标(初始缺血指数)。48小时时的演变梗死面积通过QRS评分系统评估。研究了两组患者,均在发病6小时内因前壁心肌梗死入院。第1组(n = 35)仅接受镇痛治疗,第2组(n = 33)通过冠状动脉内(链激酶,n = 13)或静脉途径(茴香酰纤溶酶原链激酶激活剂,n = 20)接受溶栓治疗。通过血管造影评估再灌注情况。两组通过初始缺血指数评估的平均(标准差)潜在梗死面积相似(第1组,∑ST面积 = 115(60)mm²,第2组 = 126(77)mm²)。代表演变梗死面积的QRS评分在治疗组(4.1(2.5))显著低于第1组(7.8(2.6))。基于成功再灌注患者入院时的∑ST面积的QRS评分95%置信区间应用于第三组患者(n = 22),以测试入院时ST面积(心肌损伤)准确预测QRS评分的能力。虽然成功再灌注的患者QRS评分显著低于未成功再灌注的患者(4.5(3.1)对9.3(3.4)),但个体间变异性导致的宽置信区间妨碍了根据入院时的∑ST面积准确预测个体患者的QRS评分。早期(≤3小时)治疗的患者(QRS评分4.2(2.8))和晚期(3 - 6小时)治疗的患者(4.1(2.1))梗死面积无差异。本研究提供的证据表明,溶栓治疗后实现再灌注的前壁梗死患者的连续心电图变化减少,且梗死发作后6小时内给予治疗均显示出这种益处。尽管如此,初始缺血指数与演变的QRS评分之间的关系有宽置信区间,反映了个体间变异性,无法预测个体患者的QRS评分。