Suppr超能文献

当代欧洲心室电风暴的管理:一项欧洲心律协会调查的结果。

Contemporary management of ventricular electrical storm in Europe: results of a European Heart Rhythm Association Survey.

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy.

Cardiocentro Ticino Institute, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Via Tesserete 48, Lugano 6900, Switzerland.

出版信息

Europace. 2023 Apr 15;25(4):1277-1283. doi: 10.1093/europace/euac151.

Abstract

Electrical storm (ES) is a predictor of mortality, and its treatment is challenging. Moreover, not all potential therapeutic strategies are available in all hospitals, and a standardized approach among European centres is lacking. The aim of this European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) survey was to assess the current management of patients with ES both in the acute and post-acute phases in 102 different European centres. A 20-item online questionnaire was sent out to the EHRA Research Network Centres. The median number of patients with ES treated annually per centre is 10 (IQR 5-15). The possibility of using autonomic modulation (e.g. percutaneous stellate ganglion block or thoracic epidural anaesthesia) for the acute ES treatment is available in only 29.3% of the centres. Moreover, although over 80% of centres perform ventricular tachycardia ablation, this procedure is available 24/7 in only 16.5% of the hospitals. There is a significant heterogeneity among centres regarding the availability of AADs and their use before deciding to proceed with a non-AAD strategy; specifically, 4.4% of centres use only one drug, 33.3% use two drugs, and 12.2% >two drugs, while about 50% of the centres decide based on individual patient's characteristics. Regarding the type of AADs used for the acute and post-acute management of ES patients, important variability is reported depending upon the underlying heart disease. Most patients considered for percutaneous ablation have structural heart disease. Only 46% of centres refer patients to psychological counselling after ES.

摘要

电风暴(ES)是死亡率的预测因素,其治疗具有挑战性。此外,并非所有潜在的治疗策略在所有医院都可用,而且欧洲中心之间缺乏标准化的方法。这项欧洲心律协会(EHRA)调查的目的是评估 102 个不同欧洲中心在急性和急性后阶段 ES 患者的当前管理情况。向 EHRA 研究网络中心发送了一份包含 20 个问题的在线问卷。每个中心每年治疗 ES 患者的中位数为 10 例(IQR 5-15)。只有 29.3%的中心有可能使用自主调节(例如经皮星状神经节阻滞或胸段硬膜外麻醉)来治疗急性 ES。此外,尽管超过 80%的中心进行室性心动过速消融,但只有 16.5%的医院可以 24/7 进行此操作。中心之间在 AAD 的可用性及其在决定采用非-AAD 策略之前的使用情况方面存在显著异质性;具体来说,4.4%的中心仅使用一种药物,33.3%使用两种药物,12.2%使用>两种药物,而大约 50%的中心根据患者个体特征做出决定。关于用于 ES 患者急性和急性后管理的 AAD 类型,据报道,根据潜在的心脏病,存在重要的可变性。大多数考虑进行经皮消融的患者都有结构性心脏病。只有 46%的中心在 ES 后会将患者转介至心理咨询。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a228/10105853/e706a1307775/euac151f1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验