论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨食管电生理对室上性心动过速(SVT)诊断及分型的准确性。方法收集近两年经射频消融治疗的SVT病例,选择其中食管电生理和心内电生理资料完整的41例,将两种电生理检查对SVT诊断及分型比较,进行χ2检验,以P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。结果两种电生理检查诊断房室结双径路(DAVNP)、慢快型房室结折返性心动过速(AVNRT)、常见的顺向型房室折返性心动过速(AVRT)差异无统计学意义;食管电生理对房室旁路(AP)的粗略定位准确性较高,但对快慢型AVNRT、慢AP参于的AVRT与房性心动过速不易辨别。结论食管电生理虽不易辨别少见型SVT,但诊断常见型SVT及分型准确性方面与心内电生理有相似的价值,且具有无创、简便、费用低等优点。
Objective To investigate the accuracy of esophageal electrophysiology in the diagnosis and classification of supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). Methods A total of 41 cases of SVT treated by radiofrequency catheter ablation were collected in the past two years and 41 cases with complete electrophysiological and intracardiac electrophysiological data were selected. Two types of electrophysiological examination were used to compare the diagnosis and classification of SVT withχ2 test, P < 0.05 for the difference was statistically significant. Results There were no statistically significant differences between the two electrophysiological tests in diagnosing DAVNP, AVNRT, and AVRT Significance; Esophageal electrophysiology of the atrioventricular (AP) rough positioning accuracy, but for fast AVNRT, slow AP reference AVRT and atrial tachycardia is not easy to distinguish. Conclusion Although esophageal electrophysiology is not easy to discriminate rare SVT, it has similar value in diagnosing common SVT and typing accuracy as electrophysiology in heart, and has the advantages of non-invasive, simple and low cost.