Suppr超能文献

区分差异性传导的室上性心动过速和室性心动过速的心电图标准:即时护理环境中的实践要点

ECG criteria to distinguish between aberrantly conducted supraventricular tachycardia and ventricular tachycardia: practical aspects for the immediate care setting.

作者信息

Drew B J, Scheinman M M

机构信息

Department of Physiological Nursing, University of California San Francisco 94143-0610, USA.

出版信息

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1995 Dec;18(12 Pt 1):2194-208. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1995.tb04647.x.

Abstract

UNLABELLED

To reevaluate ECG criteria for distinguishing supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) with aberrant conduction from ventricular tachycardia (VT), 133 wide QRS tachycardias were recorded in patients undergoing invasive electrophysiological (EP) study. Surface ECG leads (standard 12-lead and MCL leads) were compared to EP recordings to provide a standard for correct diagnosis. Criteria from six studies were pooled to select QRS morphology agreed to be highly specific for SVT or VT (specificity > 90%). Some morphological criteria were modified to simplify analysis for the immediate care setting.

RESULTS

Although the 12-lead ECG was useful in distinguishing aberrancy from VT, 13 tachycardias (10%) were misdiagnosed or could not be diagnosed. The MCL1 lead recorded clearly different QRS morphology than lead V1 in 40% of VT cases and was diagnostically inferior to V1. Most established criteria were highly specific for a diagnosis, but not very sensitive as individual criteria. Neither a QRS width of > 0.14 seconds nor a monophasic R wave pattern in lead V1 were valuable in diagnosing VT.

CONCLUSIONS

In distinguishing SVT with aberrant conduction from VT: (1) Although the 12-lead ECG is valuable, about 1 in 10 wide QRS tachycardias defy differentiation; (2) tachycardias > 190 beats/min often do not exhibit unequivocal criteria with which to make a certain diagnosis; (3) multiple leads are required for accurate assessment of QRS width, presence of AV dissociation or VA block, QRS axis, and morphological criteria; and (4) the MCL1 lead cannot be substituted for V1 in the use of morphological criteria for VT.

摘要

未加标注

为了重新评估用于区分伴有差异性传导的室上性心动过速(SVT)和室性心动过速(VT)的心电图标准,对133例接受有创电生理(EP)检查的患者的宽QRS波心动过速进行了记录。将体表心电图导联(标准12导联和MCL导联)与EP记录进行比较,以提供正确诊断的标准。汇总六项研究的标准,选择被认为对SVT或VT具有高度特异性(特异性>90%)的QRS波形态。对一些形态学标准进行了修改,以简化即时护理环境下的分析。

结果

虽然12导联心电图有助于区分差异性传导与VT,但有13例心动过速(10%)被误诊或无法诊断。在40%的VT病例中,MCL1导联记录的QRS波形态与V1导联明显不同,且诊断价值低于V1导联。大多数既定标准对诊断具有高度特异性,但作为单独标准时敏感性不高。QRS波宽度>0.14秒和V1导联出现单相R波形态对VT诊断均无价值。

结论

在区分伴有差异性传导的SVT和VT时:(1)虽然12导联心电图有价值,但约十分之一的宽QRS波心动过速难以鉴别;(2)心率>190次/分钟的心动过速通常没有明确的标准来进行确定性诊断;(3)准确评估QRS波宽度、房室分离或室房阻滞的存在、QRS波电轴和形态学标准需要多个导联;(4)在使用VT形态学标准时,MCL1导联不能替代V1导联。

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