Bigger J T
Am J Cardiol. 1986 Aug 29;58(5):58C-65C. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(86)90106-2.
Long-term continuous electrocardiographic recordings (Holter recordings) and electrophysiologic testing are useful for selecting patients for antiarrhythmic drug trials and for evaluating efficacy and adverse effects during therapy. These 2 methods are used to establish patient eligibility and to stratify patients during randomization. Both noninvasive testing and electrophysiologic studies help to classify arrhythmias as benign, potentially malignant or malignant. Holter monitoring and electrophysiologic studies each have unique advantages and disadvantages for baseline evaluation before starting antiarrhythmic drug treatment and for evaluation of efficacy or adverse effects during follow-up. Both methods have been shown to predict outcome of treatment in patients with malignant ventricular arrhythmias (i.e., can be used as surrogates for sudden death). Several ongoing studies are attempting to extend our knowledge of these 2 techniques. A multicenter study in the United States is comparing the 2 methods for applicability, predictive accuracy and cost. Investigators in the Netherlands are testing the validity of electrophysiologic studies by continuing antiarrhythmic drug treatment whether or not programmed ventricular stimulation predicts success or failure. Finally, new proposals have been made for conducting randomized, controlled studies in selected patients with malignant ventricular arrhythmias using time to drug failure as the endpoint.
长期连续心电图记录(动态心电图记录)和电生理检查对于选择抗心律失常药物试验的患者以及评估治疗期间的疗效和不良反应非常有用。这两种方法用于确定患者是否符合条件,并在随机分组期间对患者进行分层。非侵入性检查和电生理研究都有助于将心律失常分为良性、潜在恶性或恶性。动态心电图监测和电生理研究在开始抗心律失常药物治疗前的基线评估以及随访期间的疗效或不良反应评估方面各有独特的优缺点。这两种方法都已被证明可预测恶性室性心律失常患者的治疗结果(即可用作猝死的替代指标)。目前正在进行的几项研究试图扩展我们对这两种技术的认识。美国的一项多中心研究正在比较这两种方法的适用性、预测准确性和成本。荷兰的研究人员正在通过继续抗心律失常药物治疗来测试电生理研究的有效性,无论程控心室刺激是否能预测成功或失败。最后,有人提出了新的建议,即在选定的恶性室性心律失常患者中进行随机对照研究,以药物失效时间作为终点。