Suppr超能文献

腺苷对房室结折返性心动过速患者顺行和逆行快径路传导的不同影响。

Differential effect of adenosine on anterograde and retrograde fast pathway conduction in patients with atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia.

作者信息

Souza J J, Zivin A, Flemming M, Pelosi F, Oral H, Knight B P, Goyal R, Man K C, Strickberger S A, Morady F

机构信息

University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor 48109-0022, USA.

出版信息

J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 1998 Aug;9(8):820-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.1998.tb00121.x.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have shown that the fast pathway is more responsive to adenosine than the slow pathway in patients with AV nodal reentrant tachycardia. Little information is available regarding the effect of adenosine on anterograde and retrograde fast pathway conduction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The effects of adenosine on anterograde and retrograde fast pathway conduction were evaluated in 116 patients (mean age 47 +/- 16 years) with typical AV nodal reentrant tachycardia. Each patient received 12 mg of adenosine during ventricular pacing at a cycle length 20 msec longer than the fast pathway VA block cycle length and during sinus rhythm or atrial pacing at 20 msec longer than the fast pathway AV block cycle length. Anterograde block occurred in 98% of patients compared with retrograde fast pathway block in 62% of patients (P < 0.001). Unresponsiveness of the retrograde fast pathway to adenosine was associated with a shorter AV block cycle length (374 +/- 78 vs 333 +/- 74 msec, P < 0.01), a shorter VA block cycle length (383 +/- 121 vs 307 +/- 49 msec, P < 0.001), and a shorter VA interval during tachycardia (53 +/- 23 vs 41 +/- 17 msec, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Although anterograde fast pathway conduction is almost always blocked by 12 mg of adenosine, retrograde fast pathway conduction is not blocked by adenosine in 38% of patients with typical AV nodal reentrant tachycardia. This indicates that the anterograde and retrograde fast pathways may be anatomically and/or functionally distinct. Unresponsiveness of VA conduction to adenosine is not a reliable indicator of an accessory pathway.

摘要

引言

多项研究表明,在房室结折返性心动过速患者中,快速径路比慢速径路对腺苷更敏感。关于腺苷对快速径路顺行和逆行传导的影响,目前所知甚少。

方法与结果

对116例(平均年龄47±16岁)典型房室结折返性心动过速患者评估了腺苷对快速径路顺行和逆行传导的影响。每位患者在心室起搏时,起搏周期长度比快速径路室房阻滞周期长度长20毫秒,以及在窦性心律或心房起搏时,起搏周期长度比快速径路房室阻滞周期长度长20毫秒的情况下,接受12毫克腺苷。98%的患者出现顺行阻滞,而62%的患者出现逆行快速径路阻滞(P<0.001)。逆行快速径路对腺苷无反应与较短的房室阻滞周期长度(374±78对333±74毫秒,P<0.01)、较短的室房阻滞周期长度(383±121对307±49毫秒,P<0.001)以及心动过速期间较短的室房间期(53±23对41±17毫秒,P<0.01)相关。

结论

尽管12毫克腺苷几乎总能阻断快速径路的顺行传导,但在38%的典型房室结折返性心动过速患者中,腺苷并不能阻断快速径路的逆行传导。这表明快速径路的顺行和逆行可能在解剖学和/或功能上存在差异。室房传导对腺苷无反应并非旁路的可靠指标。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验