合并完全性左束支阻滞的急性心肌梗死心电图诊断的研究

仲涛; 付基伟; 韩汶君; 陈岩; 方燕飞; 郭继鸿

doi:10.13201/j.issn.1001-1439.2021.09.011

合并完全性左束支阻滞的急性心肌梗死心电图诊断的研究

- 1. 山东省潍坊市人民医院心电图室(山东潍坊, 261041);
- 2. 北京大学人民医院心内科

详细信息

通讯作者: 郭继鸿,E-mail:gjhpku@126.com

中图分类号: R541.7

收稿日期: 2021-05-17

Electrocardiogram diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction with complete left bundle branch block

- 1. Department of Electrocardiography, Weifang People's Hospital, Weifang, Shandong, 261041, China;
- 2. Department of Cardiology, People's Hospital, Peking University

More Information

Corresponding author: GUO Jihong, E-mail: gjhpku@126.com

Received Date: 17 May 2021

摘要

摘要: 目的:探讨心电图3种不同标准对合并完全性左束支阻滞(CLBBB)的急性心肌梗死(AMI)的诊断效能。方法:回顾性分析142例CLBBB患者的心电图,其中59例确诊为AMI者为心梗组,83例无AMI者为对照组。分别用巴塞罗那标准、Sgarbossa标准及Smith修定标准判读心电图,观察各标准诊断AMI的敏感度(SEN)、特异度(SPE)、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)、准确度(CP)并作对比分析。结果:巴塞罗那标准诊断SEN为94.91%(95%CI 89.94%~98.68%),SPE为87.95%(95%CI 78.51%~93.75%),其诊断SEN、CP 90.8%(95%CI 86.0%~95.6%)、NPV 96.05%(95%CI 88.12%~98.98%)显著高于Sgarbossa标准(P=0.000)和Smith修定标准(P=0.000)。巴塞罗那标准的受试者工作特征曲线下面积0.935,高于其他诊断标准(P<0.01)。结论:巴塞罗那标准诊断合并CLBBB的AMI具有较高的诊断效能,且简单易记,方便实行,临床应用价值大。
- 完全性左束支阻滞 /
- 急性心肌梗死 /
- ST段 /
- 心电图
Abstract: Objective: To investigate the diagnostic efficacy of three different ECG criteria in the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction(AMI) with complete left bundle branch block(CLBBB).Methods: The electrocardiogram(ECG) of 142 patients with CLBBB was retrospectively analyzed. Among them 59 patients diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction were assigned to the myocardial infarction group and 83 patients without acute myocardial infarction were assigned to the control group. The sensitivity(SEN), specificity(SPE), positive predictive value(PPV), negative predictive value(NPV) and capability of precision(CP) of each standard in the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction were observed and compared among BARCRLONA algorithm, Sgarbossa criteria and Smith modified criteria.Results: The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the BARCRLONA algorithm were 94.91%(95%CI 89.94%-98.68%) and 87.95%(95%CI 78.51%-93.75%). The diagnostic sensitivity and capability of precision were 90.8%(95%CI 86.0%-95.6%), negative predictive value96.05%(95%CI 88.12%-98.98%) of the BARCRLONA algorithm was significantly higher than the Sgarbossa criteria(P=0.000) and the Smith modified criteria(P=0.000). The area under receiver operating characteristic curve of Barcelona algorithm was 0.935, which was higher than other diagnostic criteria(P<0.01).Conclusion: BARCRLONA algorithm has high diagnostic efficacy in the diagnosis of AMI complicated with CLBBB, and is simple to remember, convenient to implement, and has great clinical value.
- complete left bundle branch block /
- acute myocardial infarction /
- ST segment /
- electrocardiogram

HTML全文

参考文献(14)

[1]	中华医学会心血管病学分会.急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死和治疗指南[J].中华心血管杂志,2019,47(10):766-783.
[2]	Nestelberger T,Cullen L,Lindahl B,et al.Diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in the presence of left bundle branch block[J].Heart,2019,105(20):1559-1567.
[3]	Mozid AM,Mannakkara NN,Robinson NM,et al.Comparison of clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients with left bundle branch block versus ST-elevation myocardial infarction referred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention[J].Coron Artery Dis.2015,26(1):17-21.
[4]	Smith SW,Dodd KW,Henry TD,et al.Diagnosis of ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the presence of left bundle branch block with the ST-elevation to S-wave ratio in a modified Sgarbossa rule[J].Ann Emerg Med,2012,60(6):766-776.
[5]	Di Marco A,Anguera I,Rodríguez M,et al.Assessment of smith algorithms for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in the presence of left bundle branch block[J].Rev Esp Cardiol(Engl Ed),2017,70(7):559-566.
[6]	Di Marco A,Rodriguez M,Cinca J,et al.New electrocardiographic algorithm for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in patients with left bundle branch block[J].J Am Heart Assoc,2020,9(14):e015573.
[7]	张杰,马礼坤,张理想,等.急性心肌梗死患者院内死亡风险列线图预测模型的构建[J].临床心血管病杂志,2020,36(4):311-317.
[8]	Pera VK,Larson DM,Sharkey SW,et al.New or presumed new left bundle branch block in patients with suspected ST-elevation myocardial infarction[J].Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care,2018,7(3):208-217.
[9]	Sgarbossa EB,Pinski SL,Barbagelata A,et al.Electrocardiographic diagnosis of evolving acute myocardial infarction in the presence of left bundle-branch block.GUSTO-1(Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries)Investigators[J].N Engl J Med,1996,334(8):481-487.
[10]	Dodd KW,Elm KD,Smith SW.Comparison of the QRS complex,ST-segment,and T-wave among patients with left bundle branch block with and without acute myocardial infarction[J].J Emerg Med,2016,51(1):1-8.
[11]	郭继鸿.CLBBB+AMI的心电图诊断[J].临床心电学杂志,2020,29(3):217-230.
[12]	Miranda DF,Lobo AS,Walsh B,et al.New insights into the use of the 12-lead electrocardiogram for diagnosing acute myocardial infarction in the emergency department[J].Can J Cardiol,2018,34(2):132-145.
[13]	Meyers HP,Limkakeng AT Jr,Jaffa EJ,et al.Validation of the modified Sgarbossa criteria for acute coronary occlusion in the setting of left bundle branch block:A retrospective case-control study[J].Am Heart J,2015,170(6):1255-1264.
[14]	Lai YC,Chen YH,Wu KH,et al.Validation of the diagnosis and triage algorithm for acute myocardial infarction in the setting of left bundle branch block[J].Am J Emerg Med,2020,38(12):2614-2619.