Platia E V, Reid P R
Am J Cardiol. 1985 Jul 1;56(1):79-83. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(85)90570-3.
Controversy persists among groups carrying out programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) as to which criteria should be used to define a positive test. To examine this question, the results of PVS carried out in 50 patients with documented sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent serial PVS using single and double extrastimuli and ventricular burst pacing in the right ventricle and, when necessary, the left ventricle, with sustained VT elicited during the control study in each patient. Antiarrhythmic drugs were then administered, with therapy tailored to both PVS result and ambulatory Holter monitoring, when possible. All patients were maintained and followed on the same drugs and dosages as at the time of predischarge PVS. After mean 20 months follow-up, 28 patients either died suddenly (8 patients) or had documented sustained VT (20 patients). The ability to induce nonsustained or sustained VT on predischarge PVS was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of subsequent sudden death or VT recurrence than if VT could not be induced (p less than 0.001). In addition, using the criterion of 5 or more beats of induced VT to define a positive study maximized the predictive value of PVS and provided a significantly higher predictive accuracy than if only sustained VT were used to define a positive study.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
在进行程控心室刺激(PVS)的不同群体中,关于应使用哪些标准来定义阳性试验仍存在争议。为研究这个问题,我们回顾性分析了50例记录有持续性室性心动过速(VT)或心室颤动患者的PVS结果。所有患者均在右心室(必要时在左心室)进行了单极和双极额外刺激以及心室猝发起搏的系列PVS,每位患者在对照研究期间均诱发了持续性VT。然后给予抗心律失常药物治疗,尽可能根据PVS结果和动态心电图监测来调整治疗方案。所有患者均按照出院前PVS时的相同药物和剂量进行维持治疗并随访。经过平均20个月的随访,28例患者要么突然死亡(8例),要么记录到持续性VT(20例)。与无法诱发出VT相比,出院前PVS时诱发出非持续性或持续性VT与随后突然死亡或VT复发的可能性显著更高相关(p<0.001)。此外,使用诱发出5次或更多次VT搏动的标准来定义阳性研究可使PVS的预测价值最大化,并且与仅使用持续性VT来定义阳性研究相比,具有显著更高的预测准确性。(摘要截选至250字)