形态心电图标准在原有束支阻滞伴宽QRS波群心动过速鉴别诊断中的特异性评价

为探讨形态心电图标准是否适用原有束支阻滞（ＢＢＢ）或心肌梗塞患者合并宽ＱＲＳ波群心动过速的鉴别诊断,选择窦性心律呈ＢＢＢ的患者２０５例［左束支阻滞（ＬＢＢＢ）４５例、右束支阻带（ＲＢＢＢ）１６０例］,分析形态心电图标准用于鉴别宽ＱＲＳ波群心动过速的特异性。胸导联ＱＲＳ波群图形一致、胸导联无ＲＳ型;ＲＢＢＢ时任一胸导联ＲＳ时限＞１００ｍｓ,Ｖ１导联单向（Ｒ）或双向（ｑＲ、ＱＲ、ＲＳ）、呈左兔耳征,Ｖ６导联或ａＶＦ导联Ｑ波,Ｖ６导联Ｒ／Ｓ＜１;ＬＢＢＢ时,Ｖ１、Ｖ２导联ｒ波时限＞３０ｍｓ,Ｖ１、Ｖ２导联Ｓ波降支钝挫,Ｖ６导联或ａＶＦ导联ｑ（Ｑ）波等１２条特异性较高。ＱＲＳ波群时限＞１４０ｍｓ;ＲＢＢＢ时电轴重度左、右偏,ａＶＦ导联Ｒ／Ｓ＜１;ＬＢＢＢ时Ｖ１、Ｖ２导联ＲＳ时限＞６０ｍｓ,Ⅰ导联负向ＱＲＳ波群,Ｖ４较Ｖ１导联Ｓ波振幅更深等７条特异性较低。心肌梗死合并宽ＱＲＳ波群心动过速时采用上述标准鉴别诊断有一定局限。     

形态心电图标准在原有束支阻滞伴宽QRS波群心动？…

为探讨形态心电图标准是否适用原有束支阻滞（ＢＢＢ）或心肌梗塞患者合并宽ＱＲＳ波群心动过速的鉴别诊断,选择窦性心律呈ＢＢＢ的患者２０５（左束支阻滞（ＬＢＢＢ）４５例、右束支阻带（ＲＢＢＢ）１６０例）。分析形态心电图标准用于鉴别宽ＱＲＳ波群心动过速的特异性。胸导联ＱＲＳ波群图形一致、胸导联无ＲＳ型;ＲＢＢＢ时任一胸导联ＲＳ时限〉１００ｍｓ,Ｖ１导联单向（Ｒ）或双向（ｑＲ、ＱＲ、ＲＳ）、呈左兔耳征,Ｖ６     

不完全性与假性右束支传导阻滞的心电图鉴别诊断

本文通过心向量图QRS环与相应心电图导联QRS波群改变作对照,寻找鉴别不完全性右束支传导阻滞与假性右束支传导阻滞的诊断指标,旨在提高心电图诊断的正确率。 资料和方法 1.病例 98例患者均系我院近年来门诊和住院患者,经常规心电图、Frank导联心向量图检查。(1)确诊为不完全性右束支传导阻滞者62例,男37例,女25例,年龄26—67(48.2±7.4)岁。其中冠心病24例、可疑冠心病11例、风湿性心脏病3例、左前分支阻滞8例。(2)确     

相性束支传导阻滞37例心电图分析

为加深对相性束支传导阻滞的心电图理解和认识,现将我院1980—1986年所遇见的37例与心率改变有关的束支传导阻滞的心电图与临床资料报告如下。     

心动过速揭示预激综合征合并束支传导阻滞2例报告

例1男性。38岁。因反复发作心慌胸闷就诊，心脏超声：心脏结构正常。临床诊断：阵发性心动过速。图1A记录2004年3月18日首次心电图示P波消失．心率150次／min．规则QRS波呈室上性．时限0．08s．额面电轴不偏．V1、V2导联R／S=1．V3、V5、V6导联呈R型．qR型．伴ST—T改变。心电图诊断：①窄QRS波心动过速；②房室反复性心动过速。     

宽QRS波心动过速的心电图分析

宽QRS波心动过速(WQRST)包括如下两种：(1)室性心动过速(VT);(2)室上性心动过速(SVT)或房扑、房颤合并：①束支传导阻滞(BBB)(包括左右束支);②心室内差异性传导(AVC);③预激综合征(WPW);④VT。现结合图例作分析。     

形态心电图标准在原有束支阻滞伴宽QRS波群心动过速鉴别诊断中的价值

目的探讨形态心电学标准是否适用于原有束支阻滞(BBB)或心肌梗死患者合并宽QRS波群心动过速(WRT)的鉴别诊断。方法选择窦性心律时呈BBB的患者236例[左束支阻滞(LBBB)60例,右束支阻滞(RBBB)176例],分析形态心电图标准用于鉴别WRT的特异性。结果胸前导联图形一致,胸前导联无RS图形;RBBB时电轴重度右偏(-90°~±180°)、V1导联呈左兔耳征(Rsr`.Rr`)、V6导联呈QR、QS、R形或R/S<1、aVF导联呈Qr、QR、QS形;LBBB时V1~V2导联S波降支钝挫、V6导联q(Q)波、aVF导联呈QS、qR形,Ⅰ导联呈qRr、S、Rs形等11项标准特异性较高(88.6%~100%)。另8项标准特异性较低。心肌梗死并WRT(尤其QRS呈RBBB)时采用上述标准鉴别诊断有一定局限性。结论部分形态心电图标准适用于原有BBB伴WRT的鉴别诊断,但对心肌梗死并WRT的鉴别价值有限。     

预激综合征旁道对共存束支传导阻滞心电图的影响

王医师 (住院医师 )本次教学查房的患者为男性 ,１８岁 ,预激综合征伴反复心悸４年 ,加重２个月 ,拟作射频消融术住院。入院后经各种相关检查未发现明显的心血管疾病 ,未服用抗心律失常药物。入院时窦性心律伴显性预激 ,心率７７次／ｍｉｎ,心电图Ｐ＿Ｒ间期０．０８ｓ,ＱＲＳ时间０．１６ｓ,Ｐ＿Ｊ间期０．２５ｓ,因Ｖ１～Ｖ３ ＱＲＳ波群主波向下 ,Ｖ４～Ｖ６ ＱＲＳ波群主波向上 ,而诊断Ｂ型预激综合征 ,再结合ＩＩ、ＩＩＩ、ａＶＦ导联δ波直立 ,经体表心电图定位旁道位于右心室前壁 (图１)。患者随后进行了常规心脏电生理检查及射频导…     

无人区心电轴在鉴别宽QRS心动过速中的价值

宽QRS心动过速是指QRS宽度〉120ms，频率〉100次的一类心动过速。多见于室性心动过速，也可见于室上性心动过速伴室内差异性传导，或合并束支传导阻滞或预激综合征，是急诊科和心内科医生经常遇到的心律失常。发病急，病情重，需要快速加以鉴别，给出准确判断并及时予以处理。但在临床工作中，常常遇到的问题是各种鉴别诊断程序繁杂，不确定因素较多，快速指导性不够强，无人区心电轴是鉴别宽QRS心动过速的新方法。     

Differential diagnosis of tachycardia with a typical left bundle branch block morphology

The evaluation of wide QRS complex tachycardias (WCT)remains a common dilemma for clinicians.Numerous algorithms exist to aid in arriving at the correct diagnosis.Unfortunately,these algorithms are difficult to remember,and overreliance on them may prevent cardiologists from understanding the mechanisms underlying these arrhythmias.One distinct subcategory of WCTs are those that present with a"typical"or"classic" left bundle branch block pattern.These tachycardias may be supraventricular or ventricular in origin and arise from functional or fixed aberrancy,bystander or participating atriofascicular pre-excitation,and bundle branch reentry.This review will describe these arrhythmias,illustrate their mechanisms,and discuss their clinical features and treatment strategies.     

Difficulties in the use of electrocardiographic criteria for the differential diagnosis of left bundle branch block pattern tachycardia in patients with a structurally normal heart.

In patients with left bundle branch block pattern tachycardia, electrocardiographic criteria, based on leads V1, V2 and V6, have been shown to be effective for the diagnosis of ventricular tachycardia in patients with a previous myocardial infarct. To test these criteria on a wider population, we studied 53 consecutive patients with left bundle branch block pattern tachycardia. Seventeen patients had supraventricular tachycardia and 36 had ventricular tachycardia, 18 with a previous myocardial infarction, two with cardiomyopathy, and 16 with a normal heart. The sensitivity for the diagnosis of ventricular tachycardia in patients with a previous myocardial infarct of the combined criteria was 100% but was only 50% for the other patients, which was not significantly different from the patients with supraventricular tachycardia (29%). Two other criteria, right axis shift in tachycardia and ventricular ectopics during sinus rhythm with the same morphology as the tachycardia, were only seen in patients with ventricular tachycardia, and combined with the other criteria allowed the correct identification of 35/36 patients with ventricular tachycardia. To conclude, the electrocardiographic criteria based on leads V1, V2 and V6 are not sensitive for the diagnosis of a ventricular origin of left bundle branch block pattern tachycardia in patients with a normal heart and additional criteria are required for the diagnosis in these patients.     

Value of preexisting bundle branch block in the electrocardiographic differentiation of supraventricular from ventricular origin of wide QRS tachycardia

The relation between the morphologic configuration of QRS complexes during wide QRS tachycardia induced during electrophysiologic studies and sinus rhythm was examined in 18 patients who had preexisting left or right bundle branch block. Representative QRS complexes during sinus rhythm and during tachycardia were isolated from each patient and juxtaposed for comparison. The QRS complexes that constituted each pair were judged by 4 observers as being identical, different or, if the decision was equivocal, similar. Nine patients had supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). In 8 of the 9 patients, all 4 observers found the QRS complexes during sinus rhythm and SVT identical in morphologic configuration. In the other patient, 2 observers found the QRS complexes identical and 2 found them similar. In 12 patients ventricular tachycardia (VT) was induced. In 11 of these 12, all 4 observers found the QRS complexes during VT different from their respective sinus beats. In the other patient, 3 observers found the QRS complexes different, whereas the fourth found them similar. During SVT, the QRS duration was unchanged from the corresponding value during sinus rhythm, whereas in patients with VT, QRS width increased by a mean of 56 +/- 20 ms (p less than 0.001). The results of our study suggest that the electrocardiographic differentiation of wide QRS tachycardia in patients with preexisting bundle branch block can be accomplished easily and accurately by comparing the QRS complexes during tachycardia with those during sinus rhythm: If the complexes are identical, the tachycardia is supraventricular, but if they are different, the arrhythmia is ventricular in origin.     

aVR导联四步流程在宽QRS波心动过速鉴别诊断中的应用

目的 验证分析aVR导联四步流程对宽QRS波心动过速(WCT)进行鉴别诊断的应用价值.方法 回顾性分析113例患者发生WCT时12导联体表心电图的形态学特征.按aVR导联四步流程分步骤地对113例WCT患者的心电图进行室性心动过速(室速)和室上性心动过速(室上速)的鉴别,将分析的结果与电生理检查结果进行比较,计算每一步...     

急性心肌梗死伴右束支传导阻滞的临床意义

目的　评价急性心肌梗死 (AMI)患者伴发右束支传导阻滞 (RBBB)的临床意义及预后。方法　将我院 5年来收治的AM重患者共 2 4 0例分为AM重伴RBBB组和不伴RBBB组。根据RBBB发生的时间、持续间期以及是否合并左束支分支阻滞将前者分为新发生RBBB、陈旧性RBBB、持续性RBBB、短暂性RBBB、双束支阻滞和单纯性RBBB 6个亚组 ,观察各组的临床经过和住院病死率。结果　AMI伴发RBBB 2 6例 ,占 10 8% ,与不伴RBBB比较 ,其CK峰值、恶性室性心律失常发生率、心功能不全发生率、住院病死率均显著增高 (P <0 0 1)。RBBB组高发的心功能不全发生率和住院病死率并非源自陈旧性RBBB和单纯性RBBB ,而是来源于新发生RBBB和双束支阻滞。新发生的持续性RBBB住院病死率最高 ,为 5 0 % ,短暂性RBBB为 11 1% ,而持续性RBBB的再灌注治疗率较短暂性RBBB明显降低 ( 2 5 %vs88 9% ,P <0 0 5 )。结论　AMI患者伴发RBBB提示预后不良。再灌注治疗可改善预后。     

冠心病伴束支传导阻滞患者冠状动脉病变特点研究

目的 :探讨冠心病伴束支传导阻滞患者冠状动脉血管病变特点。方法 :回顾性分析冠心病伴束支传导阻滞患者 (束支阻滞组 ,39例 )及无束支阻滞的冠心病患者 (对照组 ,35 1例 )心电图束支阻滞有无与冠状动脉病变的对应关系。结果 :与对照组比较 ,束支阻滞组左主干、左回旋支 (LCX)及三支血管 [左前降支 (LAD)、LCX、右冠状动脉 (RCA)同时存在病变 ]发生病变比率增加 (P <0 .0 1,P <0 .0 5 ,P <0 .0 5 )。右束支传导阻滞(RBBB)者LAD及RCA发病率高 ,RBBB并发左前分支阻滞 (LAFB)者三支血管病变发生率增高 ,左束支传导阻滞 (LBBB)者LAD、LCX病变发生率高 ,LAFB者LAD病变发生率高 ,房室传导阻滞伴束支阻滞患者多为三支血管病变。结论 :冠心病伴束支阻滞预示冠状动脉病变广泛而严重 ,LBBB提示冠状动脉血管病变以左冠状动脉为主 ,RBBB提示冠状动脉血管病变多累及RCA及LAD ,如存在 2种以上阻滞 ,特别是并发有左前分支或房室阻滞时 ,多提示存在三支血管病变及左主干病变     

右束支阻滞对急性心肌梗死预后的判断

目的 :观察并发右束支阻滞的急性心肌梗死 (AMI)患者的临床预后。方法 :将该院近 7年收治的2 39例AMI患者分为两组 :对照组 ,无新发的右束支阻滞 ;观察组 ,为伴有新出现的右束支阻滞。后者又根据右束支阻滞持续时间长短及是否并发其他传导阻滞分为 4个亚组。分析各组并发心功能不全、恶性室性心律失常及住院病死率的情况。结果 :观察组恶性室性心律失常的发生率、心功能受损及住院病死率分别为 19.0 %、4 7.6 %、30 .0 % ,较对照组相应的 3.0 %、19.8%、17.3%有显著增加 (P <0 .0 5 ) ;但后二者并非源自于单纯右束支阻滞 ,而与并发的其他传导阻滞有显著相关性 (P <0 .0 5 ) ;右束支阻滞持续时间周期对心功能受损及住院病死率的影响亦有明显相关性 (P <0 .0 5 )。结论 :伴随AMI新出现的右束支阻滞使患者的预后不良     

急性心肌梗死伴右束支传导阻滞的临床意义

目的 :评价急性心肌梗死 ( AMI)患者并发右束支传导阻滞 ( RBBB)的临床意义及预后。方法 :观察了 1995年 1月～ 1998年 5月 133例 AMI患者血清肌酸激酶 ( CK)及其同工酶 ( CK-MB)水平、严重并发症及死亡率。结果 :2 9例 AMI并发 RBBB(占 2 1.8% )者预后明显差于未并发RBBB者。表现为 CK及 CK- MB浓度更高 ,与心脏事件相关的并发症 (心力衰竭、完全性房室传导阻滞、心源性休克、心律失常 )发生率及死亡率均增高 ,经统计学处理 ,两组有极显著性差异 ( P <0 .0 0 5 )。结论 :AMI并发 RBBB可能是大面积梗死、心肌坏死严重的表现 ,可以作为一个预示危险的标志 ,对这些患者进行积极的介入性治疗 ,重建血管 ,可改善预后。     

Brugada法和Griffith法在宽QRS心动过速诊断中的价值

目的 :探讨 Brugada法和 Griffith法在宽 QRS心动过速 (WRT)鉴别诊断中的价值。方法 :对 61例 WRT〔其中室性心动过速 (VT) 34例 ,室上性心动过速 (SVT) 2 7例〕心电图采用Brugada法及 Griffith法进行回顾性分析。结果 :Brugada法诊断 VT的敏感性、特异性、准确性分别为 91 .2 %、85.2 %、88.5% ,略高于 Griffith法的 82 .4%、77.8%、80 .3%。结论 :Brugada法和Griffith法对器质性心脏病所致的 VT及 SVT伴室内差异传导或原有单侧束支传导阻滞者诊断的符合率高 ,但对左束支阻滞型特发性 VT、SVT伴双分支阻滞 (右束支阻滞加左前分支阻滞 )及预激综合征伴旁路前传型 SVT诊断符合率低 ,易误诊