Saoudi N, Berland J, Hocq R, Cave D, Cribier A, Letac B
Ann Cardiol Angeiol (Paris). 1987 Jan;36(1):13-7.
14 suspected of having a paroxystic atrio-ventricular block underwent a complete electrophysiological exploration including an ajmaline test. It was administered at the standard dose of 1 mg/kg at the rate of 1 mg/s. In order to evaluate a replacement test, an equivalent dose of procainamide was injected at the same rate (10 mg/kg, 10 mg/s) a few hours later. In 4 out of 14 cases the ajmaline test was positive. In only one patient, procainamide was able to demonstrate a sub-nodal block. The maximal lengthening of HV occurred at an earlier time after ajmaline than after procainamide (2.2 +/- 0.75 min. versus 4.1 +/- 1.59 min, p less than 0.02) and certainly more clear-cut (MaxHV = 73.5 +/- 12.9 ms versus 59.5 +/- 12.1 ms, p less than 0.01). The lengthening of HV after administration of these two products was significantly correlated but always markedly lesser with procainamide. In conclusion, the procainamide is less sensitive than the ajmaline test in the positive diagnosis of paroxystic atrio-ventricular blocks concerning absolute criteria in the positive diagnosis as well as relative criteria such as a definite lengthening of HV with ajmaline.
14名疑似患有阵发性房室传导阻滞的患者接受了包括阿义马林试验在内的完整电生理检查。阿义马林以1mg/kg的标准剂量、1mg/s的速度给药。为了评估替代试验,几小时后以相同速度(10mg/kg,10mg/s)注射等量的普鲁卡因酰胺。14例中有4例阿义马林试验呈阳性。只有1例患者,普鲁卡因酰胺能够显示出结下阻滞。阿义马林给药后HV的最大延长时间比普鲁卡因酰胺给药后更早出现(2.2±0.75分钟对4.1±1.59分钟,p<0.02),并且肯定更明显(最大HV=73.5±12.9毫秒对59.5±12.1毫秒,p<0.01)。这两种药物给药后HV的延长显著相关,但与普鲁卡因酰胺相比总是明显较小。总之,在阵发性房室传导阻滞的阳性诊断中,就阳性诊断的绝对标准以及诸如阿义马林导致HV明确延长等相对标准而言,普鲁卡因酰胺比阿义马林试验敏感性更低。