老年原发性高血压患者伴阵发性心房颤动启动机制的研究

目的探讨老年原发性高血压患者阵发性心房颤动(PAf)的心电启动机制。方法选择老年原发性高血压伴PAf患者63例(高血压组),进行动态心电图人工回放,分析PAf心电触发因素、PAf发作前120、60和30 s房性期前收缩(APB)发作频率及其起源部位,另选老年非高血压PAf患者44例(非高血压组)进行比较。结果高血压组心电触发因素主要为APB(66.2%),触发PAf的APB主要来源于左心房上部(61.7%)。高血压组PAf前120、60和30 s APB发作频率明显高于非高血压组(P<0.01)。高血压组触发性APB联律间期和期前收缩指数均明显低于非高血压组,而期前收缩前心动周期明显高于非高血压组(P<0.01)。结论与老年非高血压PAf患者相似,APB特别是起源于左心房上部是老年原发性高血压患者PAf最主要的触发因素。     

P波离散度与高血压并发阵发性心房颤动的关系探讨

目的探讨P波离散度(Pd)与高血压并发阵发性心房颤动(PAf)的关系。方法根据高血压是否并发PAf病史将患者分为两组(各54例),运用12导联心电图分别记录两组的最大P波时限(Pmax),最小P波时限(Pmin)及Pd,Pd=Pmax-Pmin;运用超声心动图记录两组的左房内径(LAD)及左室射血分数(LVEF)。结果Pd[(57±12·5)vs(30·79±10·11)ms],Pmax[(117±10·12)vs(104±9·10)ms],Pmin[(60±10)vs(74±11)ms]两组有显著性差异。结论Pd可作为心房心电不稳定性及高血压并发PAf发生的无创性预测手段。     

阵发性心房颤动与房性期前收缩的关系

目的对阵发性心房颤动（PAf）与房性期前收缩（PAS）进行相关性分析。方法对78例PAf者行动态心电图（DCG）检查，分析可诱发PAf的PAS及未诱发PAf的PAS的偶联间期（CI）及期前收缩指数（PI）。结果将所有诱发与未诱发PAf的PAS作比较，CI显著缩短，PI也显著缩短（P〈0．05）。结论大多数PAf发作前为频率正常的窦性心律，多由CI固定的PAS所诱发，其CI及PI明显短于未诱发PAf的PAS。     

阵发性心房颤动初始节律的动态心电图观察

目的观察阵发性心房颤动（PAf）初始节律的心电触发因素及其部位,并探讨其临床意义。方法对50例PAf患者的动态心电图进行人工回放,记录心房颤动（Af）发作次数、发作前三个心房周期及联律间期和发作前120s和30s内的房性期前收缩数,并根据触发Af的房性期前收缩的P波形态确定房性期前收缩部位。结果50例PAf患者共290次Af发作,心电触发因素中房性期前收缩占86．2％,窦性心动过缓占7．58％,心房扑动占2．75％,房性心动过速占3．45％;房性期前收缩来源于左心房上部占71．2％,左心房下部占12．0％,右心房上部占10．0％,右心房下部占2．0％,不能定位占4．8％;触发Af的房性期前收缩比未触发Af的房性期前收缩的联律间期缩短40ms以上;在PAf发作前120s和前30s期间内房性早搏发生频率由1．1次／min分别增加到4．2次／min和6．4次／min。结论房性期前收缩是PAf最主要的触发因素,长一短周期现象是PAf发作的重要启动机制,12导联动态心电图作为一种无创性的检查方法对阵发性房颤的临床诊治有重要的参考价值。     

动态心电图对阵发性心房颤动心电触发机制的分析

目的探讨阵发性心房颤动(PAf)心电触发因素及其部位,并评价其临床意义。方法对45例PAf患者的动态心电图人工回放,记录心房颤动(Af)发作次数、发作时间、发作前三个心房周期、联律间期,并根据触发Af的房性期前收缩的P波形态确定房性期前收缩部位。结果45例PAf患者共248次Af发作,心电触发因素中房性期前收缩占84.97%,窦性心动过缓占7.73%,心房扑动占2.14%,房性心动过速占2.57%;房性期前收缩来源于左心房上部占69.96%,左心房下部占12.02%,右心房上部占9.87%,右心房下部占3.86%;触发Af的房性期前收缩比未触发Af的房性期前收缩的联律间期缩短25ms以上;PAf发作存在23:00~1:00及9:00~11:00两个高峰,13:00~15:00一个低谷;PAf大多在短-长-短周期后发作,占62.23%,长-长-短周期后发作占21.89%。结论左心房上部房性期前收缩是PAf主要的触发因素,长-短周期现象是PAf发作的重要启动机制,自主神经失衡在PAf发作中起协同作用。动态心电图能对PAf治疗提供很大帮助。     

P波离散度在阵发性心房颤动的高血压患者中的意义

目的 :评价P波离散度在阵发性心房颤动的高血压患者中的意义。方法 :根据有无阵发性心房颤动病史将高血压患者分为 2组 (各 4 0例 ) ,运用 12导联心电图分别记录 2组的最大P波间期(Pmax) ,最小P波间期 (Pmin)及P波离散度 (Pd)Pd =Pmax-Pmin;运用超声心动图记录 2组的左房内径(LAD)及左室射血分数 (LVEF)。结果 :Pd[(5 5± 11)vs (2 9± 8)ms],Pmax[(116± 9)vs (10 5± 9)ms],Pmin[(6 1± 12 )vs (75± 10 )ms]2组有显著性差异。结论 :在高血压患者中P波离散度可作为心房心电不稳定性及心房颤动易发生的无创性预测手段     

肺静脉隔离对迷走神经对心房电生理特性调节及对心房颤动易感性的影响

目的越来越多的证据表明肺静脉隔离(PVI)不仅去除了心房颤动(房颤)的触发病灶,也可能改变了房颤赖以维持的物质基础,但PVI如何改变了房颤的维持机制的研究较少.研究目的在于PVI对迷走神经对心房电生理特性调节及对房颤易感性的影响.方法11只成年杂种犬,全麻及机械通气下行颈部交感-迷走神经干剥离术,经右颈内静脉穿刺术放置右心室及冠状窦导管,经左股静脉放置右心房导管,经房间膈穿刺途径放置消融及标测导管于左心房.静脉应用普萘洛尔阻断交感神经活性.分别于肺静脉消融前后在基础状态及迷走神经刺激时测量右心耳(RAA)、左心房游离壁(LAFW)、冠状窦近段(CSP)及冠状窦远端(CSD)的不应期(ERP)及心房易感窗口(VW).不应期缩短值为基础状态下的ERP与迷走神经刺激时的ERP的差值,VW定义为引起房性早搏或房颤的最长与最短S1S2间期的差值.结果(1)有效不应期的变化消融术前,迷走神经刺激能明显缩短心脏各部位的ERP.消融术后,左心房内迷走神经刺激所致的ERP缩短值明显降低[LAFW(43.64±21.57)ms与(11.82±9.82)ms,78,P＜0.001;CSP(50.91±26.25)ms与(11.82±14.01)ms,P＜0.001;CSD(50±31.94)ms与(17.27±20.54)ms,P＜0.005]右心房内变化不明显[(58.18±28.22)ms与(50.91±22.12)ms,P=0.245].(2)VW的变化消融术后,基础状态下测得的VW无明显变化[RAA(32.5±37.32)ms与(21.25±27.48)ms LAFW(31.25±28.5)ms与(35±35.46)msCSP(20±23.3)ms与(22.5±26.05)ms;CSD(30±32.95)ms与(27.5±31.51)ms.P=0.21-0.74],而迷走神经刺激时左房内测得的VW明显降低[LAFW(36.25±11.88)ms与(11.25±16.42)msP＜0.001;CSP(52.5±19.82)ms与(13.75±19.96)msP＜0.005;CSD(43.75±19.23)mS与(17.5±19.82)ms,P＜0.05],右心房内无明显变化[(52.5±22.52)ms与(42.5±10.35)ms,P=0.316].结论PVI能导致左心房(包括冠心窦)去迷走神经反应,引起迷走神经刺激时的心房不应期延长及心房易感窗口缩短.提示PVI所致的左心房去迷走神经反应可能为PVI改变房颤赖以维持的物质基础的机制之一.     

老年心力衰竭患者心率震荡变化的临床意义

目的分析老年慢性心力衰竭患者窦性心率震荡(HRT)现象的变化并探讨其临床意义。方法对57例老年慢性心力衰竭患者(心衰组)和49名老年非器质性心脏病患者(对照组)24h动态心电图(Holter)进行分析,分别计算HRT的震荡初始值(TO)和震荡斜率(TS),并进行TO、TS与左心室射血分数(LVEF)、左心室舒张末期内径(LVEDd)的相关性分析。结果心衰组与对照组HRT间存在明显差别:心衰组TO明显高于对照组(0.99±2.26vs-1.84±2.13,P<0.01);心衰组TS明显低于对照组[(2.87±1.89)ms/RRvs(8.03±3.51)ms/RR,P<0.05]。TO、TS与LVEF、LVED有相关性。结论老年慢性心力衰竭患者中HRT出现钝化趋势,TO、TS值变化作为老年心力衰竭患者预后和危险程度评估的一项参数有一定参考意义。     

急性前壁ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者介入治疗前血清血管内皮生长因子与左心室重构的关联性

目的 分析急性前壁ST段抬高型心肌梗死(ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction，STEMI)患者入院血清血管内皮生长因子(vascular endothelial growth factor，VEGF)水平与急诊经皮冠状动脉内介入术(percutaneous coronary intervention，PCI)后6个月左心室重构(left ventricular remodeling，LVR)的关联性。方法 纳入2016年1月至2017年12月在新疆自治区人民医院心血管内科行急诊PCI的急性前壁STEMI患者，收集其入院时临床资料和血液样本，采用酶联免疫吸附实验检测血清VEGF水平。在住院3天内和PCI后6个月分别对患者进行心脏超声检查，根据左心室舒张末期容积(left ventricular end-diastolic volume，LVEDV)变化情况将患者分为LVR组(n=43)和非LVR组(n=156)，其中LVR定义为随访6个月时LVEDV较基线水平增加≥20%。比较两组患者的临床变量，并采用logistic回归方程分析各变量与发生LVR的关联性。结果 LVR组患者高血压(39.5%)、2型糖尿病(30.2%)、多支血管病变(46.5%)、PCI后慢血流(18.6%)的比例以及症状出现至球囊通过时间[(5.63±2.66)h]显著高于非LVR组患者[23.7%、13.5%、28.2%、6.4%、(4.39±2.14)h]，差异有统计学意义(P均＜0.05)。LVR组患者入院后肌钙蛋白I峰值水平[(30.72±17.06)ng/mL]显著高于非LVR组患者[(23.61±15.95)ng/mL]，而入院VEGF水平[(113.23±39.44)pg/mL]低于非LVR组患者[(133.05±43.75)pg/mL]，差异有统计学意义(P均＜0.05)。Logistic回归分析显示，校正年龄、高血压、症状出现至球囊通过时间、多支血管病变、术后慢血流等因素后，2型糖尿病(OR=2.518，95% CI 1.02~6.175，P=0.044)与肌钙蛋白I峰值(OR=1.032，95% CI 1.002~1.063，P=0.034)是STEMI患者PCI后6个月出现LVR的独立危险因素，而入院时血清VEGF水平(OR=0.987，95% CI 0.967~0.999，P=0.037)是其保护性因素。结论 入院血清VEGF水平与急性前壁STEMI患者PCI后6个月发生LVR密切相关，有助于对STEMI患者进行危险分层和评估预后。     

起源于肺静脉的阵发性心房颤动发作初始的电生理特征

目的探讨起源于肺静脉的阵发性心房颤动(简称房颤)在发作初始时的电生理特征。方法记录因阵发性房颤行电生理检查和射频消融术的患者在房颤自发初始时的心内心电图,电生理检查证实起源于肺静脉,分析①房颤发作前10个心动周期的特点及计算平均周长(CL);②诱发房颤或短阵心房激动的房性早搏(简称房早)的配对间期(CI);③早搏指数(PI):即CI/CL。结果共42例患者,由房早诱发房颤85阵(Ⅰ组),诱发短阵心房激动23阵(Ⅱ组)。两组间比较,前者的CI和PI均明显短于后者,分别为(210±62msvs291±65ms,0.36±0.12vs0.48±0.12,P均<0.001)。房颤的诱发方式可分为2类:类型1(ⅠA组)为房颤发作前的10个心动周期相对恒定;类型2(ⅠB组)为房颤发作前的10个心动周期不恒定,表现为长短序列形式。85阵房颤中,ⅠA组有47阵(55%),ⅠB组有38阵(45%)。ⅠA组的CI与ⅠB组的CI无明显差异;ⅠA组的PI较ⅠB组的PI明显缩短(0.33±0.11vs0.39±0.12,P=0.02)。结论起源于肺静脉的阵发性房颤的诱发方式存在周期相对恒定与长短序列两种形式;诱发房颤的房早发生较早。     

A novel finding of the atrial substrate properties and long-term results of catheter ablation in chronic atrial fibrillation patients with left atrial spontaneous echo contrast

Atrial Substrate Properties in Chronic AF Patients with LASEC. Background: The atrial substrate in chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with a left atrial spontaneous echo contrast (LASEC) has not been previously reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the atrial substrate properties and long‐term follow‐up results in the patients who received catheter ablation of chronic AF. Methods: Of 36 consecutive patients with chronic AF who received a stepwise ablation approach, 18 patients with an LASEC (group I) were compared with 18 age‐gender‐left atrial volume matched patients without an LASEC (group II). The atrial substrate properties including the weighted peak‐to‐peak voltage, total activation time during sinus rhythm (SR), dominant frequency (DF), and complex fractionated electrograms (CFEs) during AF in the bi‐atria were evaluated. Result: The left atrial weighted bipolar peak‐to‐peak voltage (1.0 ± 0.6 vs 1.6 ± 0.7 mV, P = 0.04), total activation time (119 ± 20 vs 103 ± 13 ms, P < 0.001) and DF (7.3 ± 1.3 vs 6.6 ± 0.7 Hz, P < 0.001) differed between group I and group II, respectively. Those parameters did not differ in the right atrium. The bi‐atrial CFEs (left atrium: 89 ± 24 vs 92 ± 25, P = 0.8; right atrium: 92 ± 25 vs 102 ± 3, P = 0.9) did not differ between group I and group II, respectively. After a mean follow‐up of 30 ± 13 month, there were significant differences in the antiarrhythmic drugs (1.1 ± 0.3 vs 0.7 ± 0.5, P = 0.02) needed after ablation, and recurrence as persistent AF (92% vs 50%, P = 0.03) between group I and group II, respectively. After multiple procedures, there were more group II patients that remained in SR, when compared with group I (78% vs 44%, P = 0.04). Conclusion: There was a poorer atrial substrate, lesser SR maintenance after catheter ablation and need for more antiarrhythmic drugs in the chronic AF patients with an LASEC when compared with those without an LASEC. (J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. pp. 1‐8)     

诱发阵发性房颤的房性早搏的某些特征

目的通过12导联动态心电图（12-HOLTER）检查对阵发性房颤（paroxysmalatrialfibrillation,PAF）及其相关的房性心律失常进行检测分析,探讨PAF发生的触发因素。方法选择PAF组（n=47例,男20例,女27例,年龄64.89±12.70岁,其中房性早搏诱发PAF为诱发PAF组,房性早搏未诱发PAF为未诱发PAF组）及对照组（n=52例,男22例,女30例,年龄65.54±9.94岁）,分别行12-HOLTER检测,分析PAF及相关的房性心律失常的心电图特征,探讨PAF触发机制。结果①12-HOLTER共检出PAF72阵/次;②PAF多由房性早搏诱发（91%）,偶突然发生（8%）或由心房扑动所诱发（1%）;③诱发PAF组的房性早搏联律间期较未诱发PAF组及对照组明显缩短（490±90ms,590±140ms,630±90ms,p〈0.05）,房早指数明显较小（0.52±0.12,0.62±0.09,0.71±0.06,p〈0.05）;诱发PAF组的房早前周期较对照组明显延长（990±280ms,940±210ms,p〈0.05）;④PAF发作前2min至30s内,房性早搏频度明显增大（0.43次/分～6.00次/分,p=0.000）;⑤诱发PAF组的心电长-短周期现象发生率明显高于未诱发PAF组及对照组（50.63%,30.56%,9.72%,p〈0.001）;⑥诱发PAF的房性早搏多起源于左心房上部（77%）。结论①12-HOLTER可应用于阵发性房颤的检测与诊断,并可对诱发PAF的房性心律失常进行定量检测分析;②房性早搏是PAF的主要诱发因素;③诱发PAF的房性早搏联律间期较短,房早指数较小,房早前周期明显延长;PAF发生前多可见心电长-短周期现象;④阵发性房颤发生前30s至2min内房性早搏频度明显增大;⑤诱发PAF的房性早搏多起源于左心房上部。     

左心房内径与高龄心房颤动并缺血性卒中的相关性分析

目的 左心房内径与高龄心房颤动并缺血性卒中的相关性。方法 选取2015.01~2018.08在南部战区总医院干部病房住院的高龄患者共524例,房颤患者264例,其中持续性房颤132例(25.2%),阵发性房颤132例(25.2%),非房颤患者260例(49.6%)。通过病历资料,调取超声心动图检查结果,比较左心房内径在房颤组与非房颤组之间、房颤卒中组与非房颤卒中组之间是否存在差异。结果 与非房颤组相比,房颤组左心房左右内径(43.87±8.20mm vs 38.06±4.50mm, P=0.001)、左心房前后内径(37.96±7.24mm vs 33.54±4.51mm, P=0.001)、左心房上下内径(44.98±7.25mm vs 43.00±7.59mm, P=0.001)、右心房前后内径(53.09±6.65mm vs 48.71±7.14mm, P=0.001)、肌酐(124.42±88.20umol/L vs 110.01±48.39umol/L, P=0.023)、胱抑素C(1.97±1.22mgl/L vs 1.63±0.62mgl/L, P=0.001)、尿酸(400.13±121.34umol/L vs 378.71±118.47umol/L, P=0.043)、同型半胱氨酸(16.80±11.58umol/L vs 14.87±5.84umol/L, P=0.017)、低密度脂蛋白(1.79±0.65mmol/L vs 2.01±0.76mmol/L, P=0.001)、甘油三酯(3.38±0.88mmol/L vs 3.66±0.99mmol/L, P=0.001)、缺血性卒中(136/128 vs 78/182, P=0.001)、慢性心力衰竭(141/123 vs 69/191, P=0.001)等指标在两组之间差异有统计学意义。房颤卒中组尿酸(385.65±122.37umol/L vs 415.28±118.83umol/L, P=0.047)、左心房左右内径(44.71±7.83mm vs 42.72±8.47mm, P=0.049)、左心房上下内径(45.45±6.87mm vs 43.18±7.69mm, P=0.012)、慢性心力衰竭(81/55 vs 60/68, P=0.048)等指标与非房颤卒中组比较,差异有统计学意义。通过Logistic回归分析发现,左心房左右内径、左心房上下径、慢性心力衰竭可能与高龄房颤并缺血性卒中存在关联性,左心房左右内径、左心房上下径可作为高龄房颤并缺血性卒中的预测因子,ROC曲线下面积分别为0.596、0.588。结论 左心房内径不仅与高龄房颤并发缺血性卒中存在关联性,也可作为高龄房颤并发缺血性卒中的预测因子。     

The impacts of transcatheter occlusion for congenital atrial septal defect on atrial volume, function, and synchronicity in children: a three-dimensional echocardiography study

Objective: To evaluate the impacts of transcatheter closure for atrial septal defect (ASD) on the atria. Methods: Thirty‐four patients with ASD undergoing transcatheter occlusion were recruited in the study, and 34 patients undergoing surgical operation and 34 healthy children were age‐matched as controls. A real time three‐dimensional (RT3DE) echocardiography was used to measure the volume, function, and synchronicity of the atria. Results: There was no difference in the atrial volume and function between the transcatheter occlusion group and healthy control group (P > 0.05). However, the parameters reflecting the atrial asynchrony were larger in the transcatheter occlusion group (P < 0.05). Compared to the surgical repair group, the transcatheter occlusion group had smaller maximum volume of the left atrium (21.0 ± 5.2 ml/m² vs 24.3 ± 5.8 ml/m², P = 0.01), smaller total emptying volume of the left atrium (12.7 ± 4.3 ml/m² vs 15.1 ± 3.8 ml/m², P = 0.014), smaller total emptying volume of the right atrium (13.5 ± 5.2 ml/m² vs 16.1 ± 4.7 ml/m², P = 0.029), and larger atrial systolic asynchrony indices. Conclusions: An atrial asynchrony is observed in patients with transcatheter closure of ASD, although little negative impacts on the atrial volume and function are demonstrated, which deserves more attention during follow‐up of this specific population.     

左心房容积与冠状动脉旁路移植术后心房颤动相关性的研究

目的:评价冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)前,二维超声心动图估测左心房容积指数(LAVI)与术后心房颤动发生的相关性。方法:入选北京同仁医院2010年1月至2012年6月期间,入院实施CABG术的冠心病患者106例进行前瞻性分析。将患者分为术后心房颤动组和术后未发生心房颤动组。采用多因素Logistic回归分析,评价术前通过二维超声心动图估测的LAVI值与术后心心房颤动动发生的相关性。结果:CABG术后发生心房颤动患者19例,术后心房颤动发生率为17.9%。术后心房颤动组的LAVI值显著高于术后未发生心房颤动组[(22.1±4.1)vs.(18.1±5.1)m L/m2,P=0.018]。多元logistic回归分析显示,年龄(OR=1.015,95%CI:1.017~1.0323,P=0.026)、高血压病史(OR=1.053,95%CI:1.019~1.087,P=0.009)、既往心房颤动病史(OR=2.273,95%CI:1.207~3.340,P=0.010)、LAV值(OR=1.784,95%CI:1.181~2.487,P=0.003)是CABG后心房颤动发生的独立危险因素。结论:CABG术前通过二维超声心动图估测的LAVI值是冠心病患者CABG术后心房颤动发生的独立危险因素,对于预测CABG术后心房颤动发生并进行危险分层具有一定参考价值。     

Usefulness of interatrial conduction time to distinguish between focal atrial tachyarrhythmias originating from the superior vena cava and the right superior pulmonary vein

Objective: Differentiation of the tachycardia originating from the superior vena cava (SVC) or the right superior pulmonary vein (RSPV) is limited by the similar surface P‐wave morphology and intraatrial activation pattern during tachycardia. We sought to find a simple method to distinguish between the two tachycardias by analyzing the interatrial conduction time. Methods: Sixteen consecutive patients consisting of 8 with SVC tachycardia and the other 8 with RSPV tachycardia were studied. The interatrial conduction time from the high right atrium (HRA) to the distal coronary sinus (DCS) and the intraatrial conduction time from the HRA to the atrial electrogram at the His bundle region (HIS) were measured during the sinus beat (SR) and during the tachycardia‐triggering ectopic atrial premature beat (APB). The differences of interatrial (Δ[HRA‐DCS]_SR‐APB) and intraatrial (Δ[HRA‐HIS]_SR‐APB) conduction time between SR and APB were then obtained. Results: The mean Δ[HRA‐DCS]_SR‐APB was 1.0 ± 5.2 ms (95% confident interval [CI]–3.3–5.3 ms) in SVC tachycardia and 38.5 ± 8.8 ms (95% CI 31.1–45.9 ms) in RSPV tachycardia. The mean Δ[HRA‐HIS]_SR‐APB was 1.5 ± 5.3 ms (95% CI –2.9–5.9 ms) in SVC tachycardia and 19.9 ± 12.0 ms (95% CI 9.9–29.9 ms) in RSPV tachycardia. The difference of Δ[HRA‐DCS]_SR‐APB between SVC and RSPV tachycardias was wider than that of Δ[HRA‐HIS]_SR‐APB (37.5 ± 9.3 ms vs. 18.4 ± 15.4 ms, P < 0.01). Conclusions: The wide difference of the interatrial conduction time Δ[HRA‐DCS]_SR‐APB between SVC and RSPV tachycardias is a useful parameter to distinguish the two tachycardias and may avoid unnecessary atrial transseptal puncture.     

心房颤动患者复发性缺血性卒中的危险因素

目的 探讨心房颤动患者复发性缺血性卒中的危险因素.方法 回顾性纳入合并心房颤动的缺血性卒中患者,收集其人口统计学和临床资料,对首发卒中组与复发性卒中组的卒中相关危险因素进行比较,采用多变量logistic回归分析确定心房颤动患者复发性缺血性卒中的独立危险因素.结果 共纳入504例合并心房颤动的缺血性卒中患者,其中男性245例(48.6%),女性259例(51.4%),平均年龄(76.67±8.26)岁;首发卒中组314例(62.3%),复发性卒中组190例(37.7%).复发卒中组高血压(78.9%对69.4%;χ2=5.446,P=0.020)、糖尿病(38.9%对26.8%;χ2=8.181,P=0.004)和年龄>75岁(68.9%对60.2%;χ2=3.915,P=0.048)的患者比例以及基线收缩压[(153.30±26.02)mmHg对(148.13±26.40)mmHg,1 mmHg=0.133 kPa;t=-2.141,P=0.033]均显著高于首发卒中组.多变量logistic回归分析表明,高血压[优势比(odds ratio, OR)1.734,95%可信区间(confidence interval, CI)1.121~2.682;P=0.013]、糖尿病(OR 1.757,95% CI 1.188~2.597;P=0.005)、年龄>75岁(OR 1.680,95% CI 1.132~2.494;P=0.010)是心房颤动患者复发性缺血性卒中的独立危险因素.结论 高血压、糖尿病和年龄>75岁是心房颤动患者复发缺血性卒中的独立危险因素.     

厄贝沙坦对高血压病并阵发性心房颤动患者左房功能的影响

目的观察厄贝沙坦对高血压病并阵发性心房颤动(简称房颤)患者左房功能的影响,探讨其对房颤预防及治疗的作用。方法104例高血压病合并阵发性房颤患者随机分治疗组和对照组。两组均给予基础降压治疗,治疗组除给予基础治疗外加用厄贝沙坦。3个月后通过超声心动图观察左房功能。结果治疗后两组左房各项指标均明显改善,其中左房上下径、左房最大容积改善程度治疗组较对照组大(32.47±7.38 mm vs 38.47±6.47 mm;18.45±3.67 mm vs 30.56±3.68 mm,P<0.05或0.01)。治疗组的房颤发生次数显著低于对照组(1.2±0.36次vs2.1±0.42次,P<0.01)。结论厄贝沙坦能改善高血压病并阵发性房颤患者左房功能,降低房颤发生次数。