皮下植入式心律转复除颤器在缺血性心肌病一级预防筛查中的研究

向虹; 鲁仲巧; 王礼琳; 范洁

doi:10.13201/j.issn.1001-1439.2021.02.011

皮下植入式心律转复除颤器在缺血性心肌病一级预防筛查中的研究

- 1 云南省第一人民医院昆明理工大学附属医院心血管内科(昆明, 650034);
- 2 文山州人民医院心内科

详细信息

通讯作者: 范洁,E-mail:fanj913@sina.com

中图分类号: R541.7

收稿日期: 2020-09-03

The study with primary prevention screening of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator within ischemic cardiomyopathy

- 1 Department of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of Kunming University of Science and Technology, the First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, 650034, China;
- 2 Department of Cardiology, Wenshan People's Hospital

More Information

Corresponding author: FAN Jie, E-mail: fanj913@sina.com

Received Date: 03 September 2020

摘要

摘要: 目的:本文旨在研究具有埋藏式心脏转复除颤器(ICD)一级预防指征的缺血性心肌病患者中,皮下植入式心律转复除颤器(S-ICD)植入术前模拟体表心电图筛查在自动筛选工具(AST)和手动筛选工具(MST)两种筛查方式中的通过率及其影响因素,探讨常规12导联心电图与S-ICD的3个感知向量之间的关系,及其能否独立完成S-ICD植入前的筛查。方法:入组于云南省第一人民医院心血管内科就诊的符合S-ICD植入一级预防的缺血性心肌病患者69例,利用3120程控仪对每例患者进行模仿S-ICD装置感知向量的描记,采集12导联心电图,分别利用AST和MST对3个模拟感知向量进行分析,并得出筛选结果。结果:69例受检者中,通过AST筛查66例(95.7%),通过MST筛查63例(91.3%)。在AST与MST两种筛查方式中,Ⅱ导联通过率最高,AST筛查明显提高主要向量筛查通过率(MST 60%∶AST 80%,P＜0.001)和次要向量筛查通过率(MST 64%∶AST 86%,P=0.002),也提高了备选向量筛查通过率(MST 63%∶AST 72%,P＜0.001)。MST和AST体表心电图筛查结果之间的一致性无显著差异,但AST和MST两种筛查工具在单个感知向量水平上一致性的比较存在显著差异。在MST筛查中,63例(91.3%)体表ECG形态分析通过筛查。静息状态下常规12导联ECG筛查通过组和未通过组Ⅰ导联的T波、Ⅱ导联及avF导联的R波、Ⅰ导联及Ⅱ导联的R/T存在明显差异(P＜0.05)。结论:与MST相比,AST在单一导联上筛查通过率明显提高,MST与AST对识别不合格患者都有很高的敏感性,而对于识别真正适合植入S-ICD患者二者均缺乏特异性。临床常规12导联ECG部分导联可用于预判S-ICD体表心电图的通过情况,但不能单独进行S-ICD术前筛查。
- 全皮下植入式心律转复除颤器 /
- 缺血性心肌病 /
- 一级预防 /
- 筛查
Abstract: Objective: To investigate the pass rate and screening failure factors of pre-implantation simulated surface electrocardiogram(ECG) screening by the two ways of AST and MST for patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator(ICD) in primary prevention.Methods: The 69 patients with primary prevention of S-ICD were recorded the specialized 3-lead ECG electrodes according to using the Model 3120 Zoom Latitude Programmer. Special 3-lead ECGs were analyzed and assessed by using the MST and AST.Results: In 69 patients, 66 patients(95.7%) of AST screening tool and 63 patients(91.3%) of MST screening tool were passed successfully. In AST and MST screening tool, the pass rates of Ⅱ qualifying leads were highest, and in AST screening tool, the pass rates of primary vector(MST 60% vs. AST 80%, P＜0.001), secondary vector(MST 64% vs. AST 86%, P=0.002) and alternate vector(MST 63% vs. AST 72 %, P＜0.001) were higher than MST screening tool. The consistency of Body surface 12-lead ECG between AST and MST was not exist obvious difference. The consistency of either of specialized 3-lead ECG electrodes was exist obvious difference. In MST, the pass rate of surface 12-lead ECG was 91.3%.Conclusion: Compared with MST, AST has significantly improved the pass rate of screening on a single lead. AST show a high agreement with MST for S-ICD, but both of whom lack the specificity to identify truly qualified patients for S-ICD implantation. Clinical routine 12-lead ECG can be used to predict the qualification of S-ICD, but it is not possible for the eligibility of S-ICD to complete screening independently.
- subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator /
- ischemic cardiomyopathy /
- primary prevention /
- screening

HTML全文

参考文献(14)

[1]	中华医学会心血管病学分会,中国心肌炎心肌病协作组.中国扩张型心肌病诊断和治疗指南[J].临床心血管病杂志,2018,34(5):421-434.
[2]	冯俊,杨杰,程自平,等.经静脉途径拔除植入心律起搏装置器械选择[J].临床心血管病杂志,2020,36(7):658-661.
[3]	Guo L,Zhang M,Hu M,et al.Prevalence of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator based on template ECG screening and ineligible surface ECG predicting factors in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in China[J].Heart Vessels,2019,34(5):851-859.
[4]	Basu-Ray I,Liu J,Jia X,et al.Subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy:a meta-analysis of case-control studies[J].JACC Clin Electrophysiol,2017,3(13):1475-1483.
[5]	Groh CA,Sharma S,Pelchovitz DJ,et al.Use of an electrocardiographic screening tool to determine candidacy for a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator[J].Heart Rhythm,2014,11(8):1361-1366.
[6]	Olde Nordkamp L,Warnaars J,Kooiman KM,et al.Which patients are not suitable for a subcutaneous ICD:incidence and predictors of failed QRS-T-wave morphology screening[J].J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol,2014,25(5):494-499.
[7]	Randles DA,Hawkins NM,Shaw M,et al.How many patients fulfil the surface electrocardiogram criteria for subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation?[J].Europace,2014,16(7):1015-1021.
[8]	Srinivasan NT,Patel KH,Qamar K,et al.Disease severity and exercise testing reduce subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator left sternal ECG screening success in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy[J].Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol,2017,10(4):120.
[9]	Westerman SB,El-Chami M.The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator--review of the recent data[J].J Geriatr Cardiol,2018,15(3):222-228.
[10]	Zormpas C,Eiringhaus J,Hillmann H,et al.A novel screening tool to unmask potential interference between S-ICD and left ventricular assist device[J].J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol,2020,31(12):3286-3292.
[11]	Singh P,Afzal MR,Weiss R.Perioperative considerations during implantation of the subcutaneous defibrillator:State-of-the-art review[J].Pacing Clin Electrophysiol,2020,43(12):1451-1458.
[12]	Bogeholz N,Pauls P,Güner F,et al.Direct comparison of the novel automated screening tool(AST)versus the manual screening tool(MST)in patients with already implanted subcutaneous ICD[J].Int J Cardiol,2018,265:90-96.
[13]	Sakhi R,Yap SC,Michels M,et al.Evaluation of a novel automatic screening tool for determining eligibility for a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator[J].Int J Cardiol,2018,272:97-101.
[14]	Thomas JA,Perez-Alday EA,Hamilton C,et al.The utility of routine clinical 12-lead ECG in assessing eligibility for subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator[J].Comput Biol Med,2018,102:242-250.