London M J, Hollenberg M, Wong M G, Levenson L, Tubau J F, Browner W, Mangano D T
Department of Anesthesia, University of California, San Francisco.
Anesthesiology. 1988 Aug;69(2):232-41.
Based primarily on results obtained during exercise treadmill testing, electrocardiographic (ECG) leads II and V5 are the suggested optimal leads for detecting intraoperative myocardial ischemia. However, these recommendations have not been validated in this setting using all 12 ECG leads. Accordingly, the authors studied 105 patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing noncardiac surgery with general anesthesia by continuously recording the 12-lead ECG intraoperatively in all patients. The average duration of monitoring was 8.2 +/- 2.7 h (mean +/- SD). Ischemic episodes (i.e., greater than or equal to 1-mm horizontal or downsloping ST depression, greater than or equal to 1.5-mm slowly upsloping ST depression or greater than or equal to 1.5-mm ST elevation in a non-Q wave lead) occurred in 25 patients (24%). Out of 51 ischemic episodes, 45 involved ST depression alone, and the remaining six involved both ST depression and elevation. ST segment changes occurred in a single lead only in 14 episodes, while multiple leads were involved in 37 episodes. Lead sensitivity was estimated assuming that all ST segment changes were true positive responses. Sensitivity using a single lead was greatest in V5 (75%) and V4 (61%), and intermediate in II, V3, and V6 (33%, 24%, and 37%, respectively). The remaining seven leads demonstrated very low sensitivity (2-14%) or exhibited no ischemic changes (I and a VL). Combining leads V4 and V5 increased sensitivity to 90%, while the standard clinical combination, II and V5, was only 80% sensitive. Sensitivity increased to 96% by combining II, V4, and V5. The further addition of V2 and V3 (five leads) increased sensitivity to 100%. This study confirms previous recommendations for the routine use of a V5 lead (either uni- or bipolar) in all patients at risk for ischemia. V4 is more sensitive than lead II, and should be considered as a second choice. However, lead II, superior for detection of atrial dysrhythmias, is more easily obtained with conventional monitors. The use of all three would appear to be the optimal arrangement for most clinical needs, and is recommended if the clinician has the capability.
主要基于运动平板试验获得的结果,心电图(ECG)导联II和V5被认为是检测术中心肌缺血的最佳导联。然而,这些建议尚未在使用全部12导联心电图的情况下得到验证。因此,作者对105例已知或疑似冠状动脉疾病(CAD)且接受全身麻醉下非心脏手术的患者进行了研究,术中持续记录所有患者的12导联心电图。平均监测时长为8.2±2.7小时(均值±标准差)。25例患者(24%)出现缺血发作(即非Q波导联中水平或下斜型ST段压低≥1mm、缓慢上斜型ST段压低≥1.5mm或ST段抬高≥1.5mm)。在51次缺血发作中,45次仅涉及ST段压低,其余6次同时涉及ST段压低和抬高。ST段改变仅出现在单导联的情况有14次,而多导联受累的情况有37次。假设所有ST段改变均为真阳性反应来估计导联敏感性。单导联使用时,V5(75%)和V4(61%)的敏感性最高,II、V3和V6的敏感性中等(分别为33%、24%和37%)。其余7个导联显示出非常低的敏感性(2 - 14%)或未出现缺血改变(I和aVL)。联合V4和V5导联可使敏感性提高到90%,而标准临床组合II和V5的敏感性仅为80%。联合II、V4和V5可使敏感性提高到96%。进一步增加V2和V3(五个导联)可使敏感性提高到100%。本研究证实了先前对于所有有缺血风险患者常规使用V5导联(单极或双极)的建议。V4比导联II更敏感,应被视为第二选择。然而,导联II在检测房性心律失常方面更具优势,使用传统监护仪更容易获取。对于大多数临床需求而言,使用这三个导联似乎是最佳组合,如果临床医生有能力,建议采用。